# pennsylvania

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

SECRETARY

April 22, 2014

Mr. Shawn M. Garvin Regional Administrator

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III

1650 Arch Street, (Mail Code: 3RAOO) Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029

Dear Mr. Garvin:

I am pleased to submit to you a request to redesignate the York 1997 armual fine particulate

matter (PM 2

. 5 ) nonattainment area to attainment, and a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) including a Maintenance Plan demonstrating that the area can maintain the 1997 PM 25 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for at least ten years after redesignation, as required under Section 175A(b) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The SIP submittal also includes

the comprehensive emissions inventory required under Section 172( c )(3) of the CAA.

The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) opened a 30-day public comment period on January 25,2014, on the proposed redesignation request, maintenance plan and comprehensive

emissions inventory for the area and received written comments from one person. The public hearing scheduled for February 26,2014, was cancelled because no one expressed interest in presenting testimony or attending the hearing.

The following documents are enclosed for your approval:

1. Request for Redesignation to attainment;

2. Maintenance Plan State Implementation Plan revision, which includes the comprehensive emissions inventory and a Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget for

the purposes of transportation conformity;

3. Certification of public participation activities; and

4. Comment and Response Document.

A paper copy of the documents and a disc containing an electronic copy of the documents for the

area are enclosed. I certify that the electronic files are exact duplicates of the hard copies.

The Commonwealth followed all of the applicable procedural requirements of the State's laws

and constitution in conducting and completing the issuance of the SIP revision.

Rachel Carson State Office Building 1 P.O. Box 2063 1 Harrisburg, PA 17105-2063

717.787.2814 (JC'!. Printed on Recycled Paper 

### \67f) www .depweb.state.pa.usMr. Shawn M. Garvin

- 2- April 22, 2014

Thank you in advance for the expeditious processing of the redesignation request and SIP

revision. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Joyce E. Epps, Director, Bureau of Air Quality, by e-mail atjeepps@pa.gov or by telephone at
717.787.9702.

Sincerely,

(

E. Christopher Abruzzo Secretary

Enclosures

# C ommonwealth of Pennsylvania



# S TATE 

# I MPLEMENTATION 

# P LAN 

# R EVISION 

# : M AINTENANCE 

# P LAN AND 

# C OMPREHENSIVE 

# I NVENTORY


# Y ORK 

# N ONATTAINMENT 

# A REA 

# 1997 F INE 

# P ARTICULATE 

# M ATTER 

# N ATIONAL 

# A MBIENT 

# A IR 

# Q UALITY 

# S TANDARDS



# APRIL 201 4

Bureau of Air Quality

Pe nnsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

P.O. Box 8468 Harrisburg, PA 17105

- 8468

717

- 787

- 9495

www.dep.state.pa.us[ This page intentionally left blank

. ]- i

- Table of Contents

I. Introduction and Overview

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

A. Health and Environmental Effects of Fine Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 )

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

B. Sources of PM 2.5 and Precursor Pollutants of Concern

................................ ........... 2
C. Purpose and Structure of this SIP Revision

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

D. Public Participation

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

II. Emission Inventories

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

A. Baseline Year (2005) Emissions

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

B. Attainment Year (2 007) Emissions

................................ ................................ ........ 10
C. Growth Projection Methodologies for 2017 and 2025

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

D. Interim Year (2017) Emissions

................................ ................................ .............. 16

E. Maintenance Year (2025) Emissions

................................ ................................ ..... 17

F. Maintenance Plan Emissions Test

................................ ................................ ......... 17

III. Permanent and Enforceable Control Measures

................................ ................................ .. 19

A. Permanent and Enforceable Control Measures

................................ ...................... 19

1. Stationary Point Sources

................................ ................................ ............ 21

2. Highway Vehicle Sources

................................ ................................ .......... 26
3. Nonroad Sources

................................ ................................ ........................ 29

4. Stationary Area Sources

................................ ................................ ............. 30

B. Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for Transportation Conformity

........................ 31

IV. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Network

................................ ................................ ........ 34

V. Verification of Continued Attainment

................................ ................................ ............... 34

VI. Contingency Measures

................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 35

Table of Tables

Table II

- 1: York Area 2005 Annual Emissions (Tons per Year)

................................ ................. 10
Table II

- 2: York Area 2007 Annual Emissions (Tons per Year)

................................ ................. 13
Table II

- 3: York Area VMT (Miles) and Vehicle Emissions (Tons per Year)

........................... 16
Table II

- 4: York Area Projected 2017 Emissions (Tons per Y ear)

................................ ............. 17
Table II

- 5: York Area Projected 2025 Emissions (Tons per Year)

................................ ............. 17
Table II

- 6: York Area Maintenance Emissions Test

................................ ................................ ... 18
Table III

- 1: Summary of Emission Reductions (Tons) from 2007 to 2025 from Control

Measures

................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 20
Table III

- 2: Motor Vehicle Emiss ion Budgets (Tons per Year)

................................ .................. 32
Table III

- 3: Comparison of Safety Margin to Total Anticipated Emission Reductions in

2017 and 2025

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 32
Table III

- 4: Comparison of 2025 On

- Road Mobile VOC, NH 3 , and SO 2 Emissions to the

Total Projected 2025 Inventory

................................ ................................ ................ 33- ii

- APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: STATIONARY POINT SOURCES

A

- 1 Methodology

– Preparation of Pennsylvania Po int Source Inventories and

Instructions for Completing the Annual Emissions Reporting Forms

A

- 2 2005 NEI Tier 1 Summary

A

- 3 Facility Annual Emissions

– 2007, 2017, 2025

A

- 4 Banked Emissions Reduction Credits

APPENDIX B: STATIONARY AREA SOURCES

B

- 1 Pennsyl vania 2007 Area Source Criteria Air Pollutant Emission

Estimation Methods (Dec. 2009)

B

- 2 Area Source Annual Emissions

– 2007, 2017, 2025

APPENDIX C: REGIONAL EMISSIONS INVENTORY AND PROJECTION

METHODOLOGY
C

- 1 Technical Support Document for the Developme nt of the 2007Emission

Inventories for Regional Air Quality Modeling in the Northeast/Mid

Atlantic Region Version 3.3 (AMEC Environment & Infrastructure and SRA International, Inc. for MARAMA, January 2012)

C

- 2 Technical Support Document for the Developmen t of the 2017/2020

Emission Inventories for Regional Air Quality Modeling in the
Northeast/Mid

-

Atlantic Region Version 3.3 (AMEC Environment & Infrastructure and SRA International, Inc. for MARAMA, January 2012)

C

- 3 Technical Support Document for the Devel opment of the 2025 Emission

Inventory for PM Nonattainment Counties in the MANE

- VU Region
Version 3.3 Rev. 1 (AMEC Environment & Infrastructure and SRA International, Inc. for MARAMA, January 2012)

C

- 4 Technical Memo Emission Factors for Condensable PM

AP PENDIX D: HIGHWAY VEHICLE SOURCES INVENTORY INFORMATION

D

- 1 Mobile Source Highway Emissions Inventory

– An Explanation of

Methodology

D

- 2 Highway Emissions Estimates

– 2007, 2017, 2025

D

- 3 MOVES Input Parameter Summary

D

- 4 MOVES Input and Output Files

APPE NDIX E: NONROAD SOURCES

E

- 1 Nonroad Source Emissions

– 2007, 2017, 2025- 1

-

I. I NTRODUCTION AND O VERVIEW

A. Health and Environmental Effects of Fine Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 )

Particulate matter (PM) is a mixture of microscopic solids and liquid droplets suspended in air that include: acids (such as nitrates and sulfates), organic chemicals, metals, soil or dust particles and allergens (such as fragments of pollen or mold spores). Fine particle pollution or PM 2.5 describes particulate matter th at
is les s than or equal to 2.5 micrometers (μm) in diameter, approximately 1/30th

the diameter of a human hair. Because of their small size, fine particles can penetrate deeply into the lungs.

Health studies have shown a significant association between exposure to fine particles and p remature death from heart or lung disease. Fine particles can aggravate heart and lung diseases and have been linked to effects such as cardiovascular symptoms, cardiac arrhythmias, heart attacks, respiratory symptoms, asthma attacks, and bronchitis. The se effects can result in increased hospital admissions, emergency room visits, absences from school or work, and restricted activity days. Individuals that may be particularly sensitive to fine particle exposure include people with heart or lung disease, older adults, and
children. The article, “ Fine

- Particulate Air Pollution and Life Expecta ncy in the
United States ” by C. Arden Pope, III, et al. published January 22, 2009

, in the New England Journal of Medicine evaluate d the role PM 2.5 reductions occurri ng in the 1980s and 1990s had on the increased life expectancy observed over that period. The study found that a reduction of 10 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m 3 ) of PM 2.5 was associated with an average increase in life expectancy of

7.3 months.

PM 2.5 has significant environmental impacts, including acid rain and stream eutrophication. PM 2.5 also affects visibility (regional haze) through the scattering

a nd absorption of light. Fine particles, similar in size to the wavelength of light, are most efficient, per unit of mass, at reducing visibility. Soiling and materials damage can also be caused by PM 2.5 in the air.

The United States Environmental Protec tion Agency (EPA) promulgated PM 2.5 national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) in 1997 after evaluating hundreds of health studies and conducting an extensive peer review process. The EPA established an annual primary (health

- based) and secondary (wel fare

- based)
standard of 1 5.0 μg/m 3 , based on the 3

- year average of annual mean PM 2.5 concentrations. The EPA also establi shed a primary and secondary 24

- hour
standard of 65 μg/m 3 determined by the 3

- year average of the 98th percent ile of

24

- hour concentra tions.

On December 17, 2004, the EPA promulgated air quality designations for the

PM 2.5 standard based on air quali ty monitoring data from 2001

- 2003. The final designations were published in the Federal Register on January 5, 2005- 2

- (70 FR 944). The desig na tions became effective on April 5, 2005. The EPA designated eight areas comprised of all or portions of 21 counties in Pennsylvania

as PM 2.5 nonattainment areas. On April 5, 2005, the EPA published a supplemental notice changing the designation of cert ain areas from nonattainment to attainment based on newly available PM 2.5 quality

- assured, and certified air quality data from 2002

- 2004. The EPA supplemental notice was published in the Federal Register on April 14, 2005 (70 FR 19844 ). Mercer County was the only county in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Commonwealth or Pennsylvania )
for which EPA changed the designation for the area from nonattainment to attainment based on the 2002

- 2004 air quality data

.

The York Area , consisting of York County

, was one of eight areas in Pennsylvania designated by the EPA as nonattainment for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS. The York Area w as designated nonattainment because the area violated
the 1997 annual PM 2.5 standard of 15.0 μg/m3 based on 2001

- 20 03 monitoring
data. The York Area did not violate the 1997 24

- hour PM 2.5 NAAQS of
65 μg/m3.

B. Sources of PM 2.5 and Precursor Pollutants of Concern

Fine particle pollution can be emitted directly or formed secondarily in the atmosphere. PM 2.5 emitted directly into the air in a stable solid or liquid chemical form (including PM 2.5 that is formed near its source by condensation) is referred

to as “ primary ” PM 2.5

. PM 2.5 is formed by chemical reactions of gases in the atmosphere is considered to be “ secondary ” PM 2.5 . The chemical composition of

PM 2.5 in an area depends on the mix of emissions, location, time of year, and
weather. The chemical composition of PM 2.5 can include sulfate, nitrate, ammonium, particle

- bound water, black (elemental) carbon, a great variety of organic com pounds, and miscellaneous inorganic material

, such as dust and
metals.

Primary PM 2.5 includes soot from diesel engines, condensed organic material from incomplete combustion and compounds from condensation during combustion or smelting.

The atmospheric c hemistry of PM 2.5 formation is complex. Formation of secondary PM 2.5 depends on numerous factors

, including the relative concentration of precursors, atmospheric conditions and the interactions of precursors with each other and with other particles, cloud s or fog. The contribution of different pre cursors will vary by location.

The principal forms of secondary PM 2.5 include:

 Sulfates, formed from emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ) from power plants and industrial facilities ;- 3

-  Nitrates, formed from emission s of nitrogen oxides (NO X ) from power plants, vehicles, and other combustion sources ;

 Ammonium, formed primarily from emissions of ammonia (NH 3 ) from animal operations ; and

 Secondary organic aerosol

, formed from emissions of v olatile organic

c ompounds ( VOC s ) from incomplete combustion and evaporation fr om a wide diversity of sources.

Because of the complexity and variability of the process of particulate matter formation, the EPA recognizes that effective control measures for PM 2.5 will vary

among nonattai nment areas

. In the EPA ’ s “ Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule ” ( 7 2 FR 20586 ; April 25, 2007 ) (the I mplementation R ule)

, the EPA establishe d general presumptive policies for assessing which PM 2.5 precursors should be evaluate d for possible control s. 1 In the implementation rule,

t he EPA require d states to evaluate control measures for SO 2 and primary PM 2.5 in all locations. The EPA require d states to evaluate control measures for NO X unless a technical demonstration is made to show that NO X emiss ions from
sources in the state do not significantly contribute to PM 2.5 concentrations in the
nonattainment area

. The EPA require d states to evaluate measures for VOC and

NH 3 only if a technical demonstration is made to show VOC or NH 3 emissions significa ntly contribute to PM 2.5 in the nonattainment area.

The Department recognizes the January 4, 2013

, decision of the Court of Appeals
for the D.C. Circuit, in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA , No. 08

- 1250,
706 F.3d 428 (DC Cir. 2013)

. In its decisi on, the court granted petitions for review that challenged EPA ’ s implementation rule. After considering the petitions and EPA ’ s response to them, the court remanded the case to EPA to re

promulgate the rule pursuant to Subpart 4 of Part D of the Clean Air Act, rather than implementing it under Subpart 1, as EPA had done ( 706 F.3d at 437 )

. Because the Court remanded rather than vacated the implementation rule, the implementation rule remain s in effect unless and until EPA rescinds it or promulgates a repla cement. I n any event, this maintenance plan demonstrates
maintenance of the standard consistent with the court ’ s ruling.

In general, t he court ’ s decision could affect an area ’ s nonattainment classification, certain deadlines, and the impacts of failing t o attain timely, and could impose a deadline for implementation of reasonably available and best available control

measures ( 706 F.3d at 436, n. 6 )

. Since the York Area is already attaining the NAAQS, however, those considerations are not rele vant for thi s maintenance plan. The court noted that PM 2.5 precursors, including ammonia and VOCs, are presumptively regulated in PM 2.5 nonattainment areas under Subpart 4 , pointing specifically to section 189(e), which applies to control of major stationary sources

1 The EPA ’ s definition of “ PM 2.5 attainment plan precursor ” can be found in 40 CFR Section 51.1000 , which reads:

“ PM 2.5 attainment plan precursor means S0 2 and those other PM 2.5 precursors emitted by sources in the State which
the State must evaluate for emission reduction measures to be included in its PM 2.5 nonattainment area or maintenance area plan

. ”- 4

- of PM 10 [the court stated that PM 10 includes PM 2.5 throughout Subpart 4] ( 706 F.3d at 436, n. 7, and at 437, n. 10 )

. According to CAA Section 189(e), control requirements applicable for major stationary sources of PM 10 also apply to major stationary sourc es of PM 10 precursors , except where the Administrator determines that major stationary sources do not contribute significantly to PM 10 levels that exceed the standard in the area ; S ection 189(e) also requires EPA to issue guidelines regarding the applicati on of S ubsection (e). Pennsylvania
assessed emissions of PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X , VOC and NH 3 for the maintenance
demonstration

.

T his State Implementation Plan ( SIP ) revision provides emissions information for all pollutants ( PM 10 , PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X , VOC and NH 3 )

, as required by EPA ’ s guidance entitled, “ Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations. ” 2

C. Purpose a nd Structure o f t his SIP Revision

In D ecember 2004

, after consultation with states and receipt of public input, the EPA designated eight areas in Pennsylvania

, compris ing all or part s of

21 Pennsylvania counties

, as PM 2.5 nonattainment areas based on air qu ality monitoring data from 2001

- 2003. Under Section 110 of the Clean Air Act ( CAA )

, Pennsylvania is required to develop a revision to the SIP to demonstrate
how the York Area will attain the standard by April 2010, meet emission reduction requirements in the CAA and ensure that in the event of a future violation or failure to meet emission reduction milestones, the area is brought
back to atta inment as quickly as possible.

However, o n September 25, 2009

, the EPA determined that the York Area had
attained the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS based on quality assured, quality controlled and certified ambient air monitoring data that show the area ha d monitored attainment
based on 200 6

- 2008 data ( “ Clean Data Determination ” ) (74 FR 48863)

. This final action suspended the requirements for this area to submit an attainment demonstration and associated reasonably available control measures, reasonable further progress plans, contingency measures and other planning SIP revision s related to the attainment of the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS for so long as the area
continues to a ttain the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS 3

.

EPA ’ s determination of attainment and the Clean Data Determination d id not

“ redesignate ” the area as “ attainment. ” The York Area remain s a designated
nonattainment area for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS until the Commonwealth submits,

2 Emissions 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.

3 The EPA followed this action on J uly 29, 2011 (76 FR 45424) with a statutorily required determination under
Section 179(c) of the CAA, that the York Area attained the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of April 5, 2010. EPA based this determination on complete, quality as sured, and certified ambient air monitoring data
that show the area monitored attainment for the 2007

- 2009 monitoring period.- 5

- and EPA approves, a Request for R edesignation and a Maintenance P lan showing
the area can mainta in the standard for at least 10 years. N onattainment new
source review continue s to apply until EPA redesignates the area as attainment ( 72 FR 20603 )

. Transp ortation conformity and genera l conformity also apply ; they will continue to apply to the area even after redesignation by EPA as
attainment

. The C lean D ata D etermination does not suspend the CAA
Sec tion 172(c)(3) requirement to establish a comprehensive inventory for all pollutants considered potential precursor s to PM 2.5 and for direct emissions of

PM 2.5.

This SIP revision includes the Maintenance P lan for the York Area and the 200 7 comprehensive inventory required under Sec tion 172(c)(3) of the CAA for point, area, highway and nonroad sources of direct PM 2.5 , PM 10 (particles less than

10 microns in diameter), SO 2 , NO X , VOC and NH 3

. The 2007 comprehensive inventory also serves as the attainment year inventory representing the emissions present during a period the York Area was attaining the PM 2.5 NAAQS

.

To demonstrate maintenance of the PM 2.5 NAAQS for this area, Pennsylvania is
show ing that the future emissions of PM 2.5 and its precursors will remain at levels that will provide for maintenance of the P M 2.5 NAAQS for at least 10 years, taking economic, population and travel growth into account ( See, EPA,

“ Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment, ” John Calcagni (September 4, 1992) (1992 Calcagni Memo) )

. This Maintenance Plan contains an attainment year inventory for 2007 and demonstrates that emissions will not be greater in 2017 and 2025 than the attainment year , with the exception
of NH 3

. The small projected increase in NH 3 emissions does not present a
concern for maintain ing the NAAQS because the NH 3 emissions overall are small compared with the SO 2 , NO X and VOC emissions, which are all projected to
continue to decline in the York Area

. The plan describes emission reduction measures that have been previously adopted; it n either changes existing measures nor adopts additional measures . The plan indicates how M aintenance P lan progress will be tracked and identifies measures that would be available to promptly correct any NAAQS violation.

Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA req uires that a Maintenance Plan be fully approved by the EPA before an area can be redesignated as attainment. The
Maintenance Plan is considered a SIP revision under Section 110 of the CAA

. A state may submit the R equest for Redesignation and the Maintena nce Plan at the same time and federal rulemaking on both may proceed on a parallel track.

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, t he R equest for Redesignation submitted concurrently with this Maintenance Plan indicates that
the Y ork Area has attained the NAAQS and that attainment wa s due to permanent
and enforceable control measures. The R equest for Redesignation also
demonstrates that the Commonwealth has met all of the regulatory and planning- 6

- requirements under the CAA for the York Area that we re due before the date of
the R equest for Redesignation

.

In Section 5 of the 1992 Calcagni Memo, EPA re commends the following to ensure maintenance of the NAAQS:

 The state should continue to operate an appropriate air quality monitoring network in order to verify the area ’ s attainment status (addressed in
Section IV of th is Plan);

 The state should develop an emissions inventory to identify the level of emissions sufficient to attain the NAAQS. This “ attainment year

i nventory ” was develo ped for 2007 , the mid

- year of the three

- year monitoring period on which the September 25, 2009, Clean Data Determination was based showing that the NAAQS was met (addressed in
Section II of this Plan and in the Request for Redesignation ) ;

 The state may de monstrate maintenance by show ing that the future emissions of a pollutant or its precursors will not exceed the level of the attainment inventory over at least 10 years following redesignation, taking economic growth into account. The Pennsylvania Departm ent of Environmental Protection ( DEP or Department) has develop ed emission
inventories for 2025 and for 2017 , an interim year between the attainment year and the maintenance year (addressed in Section II of this Plan) ;

 The Commonwealth should ensure that it has the legal authority to implement and enforce all measures necessary to attain and maintain the NAAQS, and indicate how maintenance plan progress will be tracked (addressed in Sections III and V of this Plan and the R equest for Redesignation ); and

 T he Commonwealth should identify measures that would be available to promptly correct any NAAQS violation (addressed in Section VI of this Plan).

This document describes how the Commonwealth will meet those criteria.

Th is Maintenance Plan demonstrates tha t the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS wil l be
maintained for at least 10 years after redesignation of the York Area to attainment
of the standard

. T he Maintenance Plan shows that emission levels of PM 2.5 and its

precursors over the 10 years following redesignation remai n at levels that will provide for maintenance of the PM 2.5 NAAQS

, even considering growth in populatio n and vehicle miles traveled.- 7

- Th is Maintenance Plan also shows that t he following state and federal programs will ensure the continuing decline of PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X and VOC emissions :

 The Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) ;

 Emission limits for large industrial boilers;

 State regulation of cement kilns, large stationary internal combustion engines , and smaller sources of NO X ;

 State regulations incorporating b y reference the federal Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) regulations;

 State requirements for Best Available Technology ( BAT ) ;

 State regulation of the sulfur content of fuel oil ;

 State regulation of VOC emissions from a dhesives, s ealants, p ri mers and

s olvents;

 The Pennsylvania and federal new motor vehicle emission control programs for p assenger and light

- duty trucks;

 The Pennsylvania and federal heavy

- duty di esel emission control

programs;

 Federal fuel programs for highway vehicles and nonroa d mobile equipment; an d

 Federal regulation of offroad diesel and gasoline

- powered vehicles and equipment.

Emission reductions from Pennsylvania ’ s Diesel

- Powered Motor Vehicle Idling

Act , Act 124 of 2008 (Idling Act)

, were not included in the 2017 and 2025 emission inventories, and, thus, were not relied upon for the demonstration of
maintenance. The Idling Act was approved by EPA as a SIP revision on August 1, 2011 (76 FR 45705). Similarly, NO X and VOC emission reductions from Pennsylvania ’ s Outdoor Wood

- Fired Boilers regulation were not included in
the 2017 and 2025 emission inventories, and

, thus, were not relied upon for the
demonstrat ion of maintenance. The Outdoor Wood

- Fired Boiler regulation was published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin on October 2, 2010 (40 Pa. B. 5571)

, and approved by EPA as a SIP revision on September 20, 2011 (76 FR 58114). Emission reductions from these measures may nonetheless assist the York Area in maintaining the PM 2.5 NAAQS.

In th is Maintenance Plan, the Department provide s assurances that it will continue to operate the ambient air quality monitoring network in order to track maintenance of the standard and to evaluate emissions inventories periodically compared to the projections provided in the plan. The Department also provide s a list of potential contingency measures that it would consider to correct any violation of the NAAQS that occurs af ter redesignation of the area.

Eight years following redesignation, the Commonwealth will submit a revised plan that ensures atta inment of the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS through 2035

.- 8

-

D. Public P articipation

Requirements for a public comment process are set forth in Sec tion 110(a)(2) of the CAA, 40 CFR Section 51.102(d) and Section 7.5 of the Pennsylvania Air Pollution Control Act, 35 P.S. Section 4007.5 (b)

. On January 25, 2014, t he Department provided not ice of a public comment period and the opportunity for a hearing on the York Area Maintenance Plan for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS , 2007 comprehensive inventory required by Section 172(c)(3) of t he CAA, and the Request to Redesignate the York Area to attainment for the 1997 PM 2.5 standard

. The public comment period closed February 28 , 2014 . The Department scheduled the public hearing to occur on February 26 , 2014, but no persons expressed intere st in presenting testimony or attending. Therefore, the Department cancelled the hearing. The Department received comments from one commentator, which have been addressed in a Comment and Response document.

II

. E MISSION I NVENTORIES

To demonstrate maint enance of the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS for th e York A rea, Pennsylvania
is show ing that the future emissions of PM 2.5 and its precursors will remain at levels that will provide for maintenance of the PM 2.5 NAAQS for at least 10 years, taking economic, population an d travel growth into account. EPA ’ s C lean D ata D etermination for the
York Area was based on 2006

- 2008 monitoring data. This Maintenance Plan contains an attainment year inventory for 2007 and demonstrates that emissions will not be greater
than the attai nment year in 2017 and 2025 , with the exception of NH 3 , but the small projected increase in NH 3 emissions does not present a concern for maintaining the NAAQS because the NH 3 emissions overall are small compared with the SO 2 , NO X and VOC emissions, which a re all projected to continue to decline in the York Area

. This
Maintenance Plan also contains a 2005 baseline inventory that represents the emissions present when the York Area did not meet the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS. In addition, this SIP
revision fulfills th e requirement for a comprehensive inventory for the York Area under

40 CFR Section 51.1008 to meet the requirements of S ection 172(c)(3) of the CAA

. As specified by the EPA, the pollutants inventoried by Pennsylvania include direct PM 2.5 , PM 10 , SO 2 , NO X , VOC, and NH 3 . Information on the manmade sources of these pollutants was compiled for:

 “ Stationary point sour ces ” (or “ point ” sources)

, which are sources for which the Department collects individual emissions

- related information. Generally

, they

represe nt major stationary sources but may be smaller.

 “ Stationary a rea sources , ” which are industrial

, commercial , and residential sources too small or too numerous to be handled individually . These include but
are not limited to commercial and residential ope n burning, architectural and industrial maintenance coatings application and clean

- up, consumer product use, and vehicle refueling at service stations. Where there is overlap between stationary point sources and stationary area sources, the area source va lues are adjusted to remove any double counting.- 9

-

 “ Highway vehicles

, ” which include passenger cars and light

- duty trucks, other trucks, buses and motorcycles.

 “ Nonroad sources

, ” which encompass a diverse collection of engines

, including
but not limited to outdoor power equipment, recreational vehicles, farm and construction machinery, lawn and garden equipment, industrial equipment,
recreational marine vessels , commercial marine vessels, locomotives, ships, and
aircraft.

Pennsylvania and other Northeaster n and Mid

- Atlantic states participated in a regional effort to refine the emissions inventory and to compile a regional emissions inventory.
The Mid

- Atlantic Regional Air Management Association (MARAMA) coordinated that regional effort, which allowed stat es to pool their resources to compile a regional emissions inventory for the purpose of conducting the regional modeling analysis used in Pennsylvania ’ s air quality management p lanning efforts to attain the 8

- hour ozone NAAQS and the PM 2.5 NAAQS, and to pr epare the regional haze plan.

A. B ase line Year (200 5 ) Emissions

An emission inventory is an estimate of the emissions from sources in a particular

area. The 2005 baseline year emissions inventory r epresents the emissions
present during a time period whe n the York Area did not meet the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS. The Department considered using 2002 as the baseline year; however,
emissions from PPL ’ s Brunner Island facility were uncharacteristically low in 2002, so the Department opted to use 2005 as the baseline year. The 2005 National Emissions Inventory (NEI) was the next availa ble periodic emission inventory developed by EPA.

The 2005 NEI is a composite of emission estimates reported by state and local agencies and industry, as well as estimates generated b y EPA. The 2005 NEI was based in part on information submitted by the Department under the Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR), which was published in the F ederal Register on Monday, June 10, 2002 (67 FR 39602)

. The CERR required States to prepa re and submit a comprehensive statewide inventory every three years.

The 2005 emissions inventory data was obtained from the EPA ’ s web site for the
2005 NEI . The data can be accessed at: http://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/net/2005inventory.html

. Appendix A

- 2 contains
Tier 1 summary data of the 2005 NEI

.

The 2005 baseline year inventory includes the pollutants PM 10 , PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X , VOC, and NH 3 . The inventory consists of sources in four secto rs: e lectric

g enerating u nits (EGUs)

, non

- EGU point and stationary area sources, highway
vehicle sources and nonroad sources. The 2005 inventory is not directly comparable to the 2007, 2017 and 2025 inventories because of changes in- 10

- inventory methodology . Highway vehicle emissions in the 2005 NEI were generated using the MOBILE6 model. For the same VMT and other parameter s , the MOBILE6 model predicts significantly lower NOx emissions than the current model, MOVES2010. In addition, MARAMA adjusted PM em issions to account for condensable PM emissions from EGUs in the 2007, 2017 and 2025 emission
inventories . This results in higher PM emissions in the 2007 inventory than were reported by facilities to the Department in 2007

. Table II

- 1 summarizes the
emi ssions for 2005.

Table I I

- 1: York Area 2005 Annual Emissions (Tons per Year)

B. Attainment Year (2007) Emissions

Stationary Point Sources. The 2007 stationary point source inventory was based on emissions reported to the Department by facilities. The Department requires owners and operators of larger facilities to submit annual production figures and emission calculations each year. Throughput data are multiplied by emission factors from Factor Information Retrieval (FIRE) Data System and the EPA ’ s publication series AP

- 42 and are based on Source Classification Code (SCC). Each process has at least one SCC assigned to it. If the owners and operators of facilities provide more accurate emission data based upon other factors, these
emission estimat es supersede those calcul ated using SCC codes. Appendix A

- 1 includes information on stationary point source emission methodology, and Appendix A

- 3 includes the data set for facility 2007 annual emissions

, as well as projected facility emissions for 2017 a nd 2025. Appendix A

- 4 is a table documenting the banked emissions reduction credits for the York Area in the
2017 and 2025 emission projection s

.

Condensable PM is a vapor or gas at stack temperature that condenses to a l iquid
or solid at stack exit. Con densable emissions from EGU s were not reported uniformly by all facilities

. Because of the need to consider the effect of condensable emissions from EGUs on regional haze and fine particles, the 2007 inventory data was augmented, utilizing the condensable emission factors for EGUs developed for MARAMA in 2008 to calculate condensable PM emissions where that data was missing. Appendix C

- 4 contains the technical memorandum describing how the emission factors were developed. The general process is to
use th e emission factors and heat input to calculate the condensable PM ( PM

- CON ) emissions, and then to perform the gap filling for compounds missing
from the facility

- reported emissions

.- 11

- Stationary Area Sources

. Stationary a rea source emissions are generally estimated by multiplying an emission factor by some known indicator or collective activity for each area source category at the county level. Pennsylvania
estimates emissions from stationary area sources using emission factors and SCC
codes in a m ethod si milar to that used for stationary point s ources. Emission factors may also be derived from research and guidance documents if those
documents are more accurate than FIRE and AP

- 42 factors. Throughput estimates are derived from county

- level activity data, by apportioning national or statewide activity data to counties, from census numbers, and from county employee numbers. County employee numbers are based upon North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes to establish that those numbers are

spe cific to the industry covered.

EPA emissions inventories and emission estimation tools were used to create the 2007 area source inventory. For many area source categories, the most recent
EPA data was used. These categories included ammonia emission s from livestock and fertilizers which came from a recent application of the Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) ammonia model to produce 2007 emissions ; output from a version of the Residential Wood Combustion (RWC) model developed by EPA and run with update d 2007 data to produce emission estimates for that
source category ; and EPA data on wildfire emissions developed as part of EPA ’ s SMARTFIRE system. The EPA develops area source emission estimation methodologies and estimates for the NEI on a three

- year cy cle. Where 2008 NEI data were used to fill missing categories in the 2007 inventory, no growth adjustment was made to the emissions with the assumption that activity in 2008
and 2007 was similar.

For fugitive dust area sources, the 2007 inventory was adj usted to apply the EPA

PM “ transport factors ” to fugitive dust sources.

Appendix B

- 1 co ntains the methodology for the 2007 Pennsylvania area source
inve ntory. Additional methodology information is available in the technical support document for the 2007 regional inventory wh ich is contained in Appendix C

- 1

. Appendix B

- 2 contains the stationary area source emissions data
for 2007 , 2017 and 2025 for the York Area

.

Highway Vehicle Sources. EPA ’ s MOVES2010 (M o tor Vehicle Emission Simulator) is the official model for estimating air pollution emissions from onroad mobile sources including buses, cars, trucks and motorcycles. MOVES2010 replaces MOBILE6.2, the previous mobile source model

. Therefore, t he Department employed MOVES2010 to estimate the onroad em issions inventory for 2007, 2017 and 2025

.

Additional information on highway emission method ology is available in Appendix D. App endix D

- 1 summarizes the methodology and data inputs used to- 12

- produce the mobile emissions inventory. Appendix D

- 2 provides t he 2007 attainment year and 2017 and 2025 projections of mobile (highway) vehicle miles travelled ( VMT ) and annual PM 2.5 direct and prec ursor emissions. Appendix D

- 3
describes the model inputs used to generate emission factors for a specific area.

Some e xamples of th e inputs described in Appendix D

- 3 are the type and frequency of vehicle emission testing, the fuel types required in the area, temperatures by month, and fleet a ge. The summary in Appendix D

- 3 indicates
when default information contained in the model is used rather than specific area

i nformation.

Nonroad Sources

. The 2007 inventory for the majority of nonroad cat egories was generated using NMIM 2008 of which the NONROAD m odel is a part. The NONROAD model estimates emissions for diesel, ga s oline, liquefied petroleum

gas , and compressed natural gas

- fueled nonroad equipment types and includes growth factors. For nonroad vehicle the NMIM does not estimate emissions from aircraft, locomotives or commercial marine vessels. Emissions from aircr aft, locomotives, and commercial marine vessels were estimated using EPA guidance and best available information. If specific local operational data was available,
that data was used to estimate emissions. State and national data was used if local
data w as unavailable. NMIM includes emissions from airport ground support equipment. However, emissions for airport ground support equipment calculated by NMIM were removed because EPA considers the emissions calculated by the
EDMS to be better estimates of th e emissions from airport ground support equipment. Growth estimates for source categories modeled by NMIM are included in the model. The EPA default values were used for most categories

.

Aircraft. For airport emissions, Pennsylvania used the database d eveloped by EPA to support the 2008 NEI, as described in the technical support document for the development of the 2 007 inventory i n Appendix C

- 1.

Railroad Emissions

. The Department used the emissions inventory developed by the Eastern Regional Technical Advisory Committee (ERTAC). Emissions from
2007 and 2008 were considered to be identical. ERTAC completed a nationwide inventory with the assistance of the railroad associations and submitted the inventory to the EPA. The ERTAC inventory was the accept ed inventory for the
2008 NEI and was loaded into the EPA ’ s Emission Inventory System (EIS). The Department made slight modifications in cooperation with ERTAC that resulted in changes in emissions of smaller Class III railroads operating in Pennsylvania which included locomotive yard operations. The Department had developed its own inventory using information received from a statewide survey of railroad operational data. The Department determined that ERTAC ’ s methodology and inventory were similar to th e Department ’ s method except in the cases of some
smal ler railroads mentioned above.

ERTAC developed an emissions inventory for Class I, II, and III line haul activity based on fuel use, tonnage carried by the railroad using each individual rail link,- 13

- cur rent in

- use locomotive emission standards, and rail link use. Track grade and locomotive power settings were not considered. ERTAC based their yard locomotive emissions on (1) name and location of rail yards, (2) number of switchers operating per yard, ( 3) the tier/year of switchers, (4) annual fuel use (gal lons /y ear ) for switchers per yard, (5) approximate duty cycle or just percent of time in idle for operating switchers, and (6) temporal characteristics of the
switcher ’ s use.

Summary of 2007 Emissions Inventory. An emissions inventory of 2007
emissions of PM 10 , PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X , VOC, and NH 3 for the York Area identifies PM and PM precursor emissions during the period when the York Area
demonstrated it attained the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS. Table II

- 2 summariz es the
emissions for 2007. I nventory methodology differences exist between the 2005 and 2007 emission inventories. Highway vehicle emissions in the 2005 NEI were generated using the MOBILE6 model. For the same VMT and other parameter s , the MOBILE6 model predicts significantly lower NOx emissions than the current model, MOVES2010. In addition, MARAMA adjusted PM emissions to account for condensable PM emissions from EGUs in the 2007, 2017 and 2025 emission
inventories

. This results in higher PM emission s in the 2007 inventory than were reported by facilities to the Department in 2007. While the 2005 emissions inventory is not directly comparable to the 2007, 2017 and 2025 inventories,

PM 2.5 , SO 2 , VOC, and NH 3 emissions decreased by 36 percent

, 1 percen t

, 23 percent and 9 percent , respectively, from 2005 to 2007. E missions of NOx in

2007 were 3,492 tons ( 10 percent ) more than in the 2005 NEI. Further
assessment shows that t he increase is in the highway vehicle sector and is due to
the fact that MOBILE6 was used to generate the 2005 NEI highway vehicle emission estimates while MOVES2010 was used to generate the 2007 NEI highway vehicle emission estimates. Therefore, the difference between 2005 and 2007 NOx emissions is the result of a methodology differ ence rather than a “ real ”
emissions increase.

Table II

- 2: Y ork Area 2007 Annual Emissions (Tons per Year)

C

. Growth Projection Methodologies for 2017 and 202 5

This section describes the data, methods, and assumptions utilized in developing
estimat es o f emissions changes between 2007 and interim year 2017 and maintenance year 2025

. Appendix C

- 2 contains the technical support document
for the d evelopment of the 2017 e mission s inventory . Appendix C

- 3 contains the- 14

- technical support document for the d evelopment of the 2025 emissions inventory.
The document s prov ide details on the specific factors, control assumptions, and implementation schedules used in the emission projection calcula tions for each source category. MARAMA coordinated development of the projection inventories for the regional inventory, consisting of the states in the
Mid

- Atlantic/Northeast Visibility U nion and Virginia (MANE

- VU+VA).

Significant infrastructure development to extract natural gas from the Marcellus
Shale formation in s ome Pennsylvania counties has occurred. Point and area source emissions result from the placement of drilling equipment, gathering lines and compressor stations. The York Area has not experienced any Marcellus Shale development and is not expected to exp erience any of this development in
the future.

EGUs

. A nnual 2007 EGU point emissions were “ grown ” to 2017 and 2025 using growth factors based on AEO2011 Table 96

- Electricity Generation by Electricity Market Module Region and Fuel Source

. The appropria te AEO2011 growth factor was applied to the 2007 emissions to calculate a “ growth only ”
emission value for 2025. P ost

- 2007 controls or shut downs were applied on a
unit

- by

- unit basis. The control factors were applied to the grown emissions to
calculate a “ growth and control ” emission value for 2025. A more detailed description of the methodology used to project emissions from EGUs is located in the technical support document for the development of the 2025 emi ssions inventory in Appendix C

- 3

.

Non

- EGU Po int Sources and Stationary Area Sources. For non

- EGU point

sources and stationary area sources

, the emission projections for the 2017 a nd
2025 were based on Version 3 .3 of the 2007 MANE

- VU+VA inventory, which

was adjusted to apply the EPA PM “ transport fa ctors ” to fugitive dust area

sources.

The methodology for projecting emissions to 2017 and 2025 is documented in the technical support documents for the development of the 2017 and 2025 emissions inventories contained in Appendix C

- 2 and Appendi x C

- 3, res pectively. These documents were prepared for MARAMA as part of an effort to assist states in developing maintenance plans for fine particles. The documents describe the data sources, methods, and r esults for emission forecasts.

NonEGU point source and s tationary area source grow th factors were developed using :

 Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) fuel c onsumption forecasts;

 State

- level employment projections by NAICS code; and

 Other state

- specific emission projection data.- 15

- Generally

, AEO projection factors wer e used for fuel consumption sources and employment data for other source categories. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) publishes the AEO annually. The AEO contains long

- term projections of energy supply, demand and prices. AEO2010 fuel

- us e forecasts were available during inventory development. After AEO2011 was published, MARAMA compared the AEO2010 and AEO2011 projections. Minor differences were found for most categories. Based on this analysis, t he AEO 2010
fuel

- use forecasts were used for all residential, commercial and industrial sector fuel use, except for industri al natural gas usage, where AEO 2011 projections were
used.

Predicted declines in fuel use and employment resulted in negative growth factors
for some non

- EGU point source and stationary area source categories. Consequently, for some categories, emissions are lower for the projected future years than for the base year, eve n before the application of control assumptions. Because of the possibility that facilities could appl y for and sell Emission Reduction Credits (ERCs) at the level of the base year inventory, Pennsylvania opted for the conservative approach of assuming no growth (growth factor=1) for

non

- EGU point source categories with negative AEO or employment growth
fa ctors.

Highway Vehicle Sources. The EPA ’ s a pproved highway vehicle emission model, MOVES 2010 , projects highway vehicle average fleet emission factors. State specific information was used where available and appropriate. Traffic forecasts were compiled using information from the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation ’ s ( PennDOT ) Traffic Information System and
socioeconomic data. The Pennsylvania methodology for estimating highway
vehicle emissions is consistent with the April 2010 guidance published by the

EPA ’ s Office of Transportation and Air Quality ( OTAQ ) entitled

, Technical Guidance on the Use of MO VES2010 for Emissions Inventory Preparation in State Implementation Plans and Transportation Conformity

. Appendi ces D

- 1 through D

- 3 of this Maintenan ce Plan i nclude s pecific information on the highway emission s inventory methodology , data files of emissions estimates
and MOVES input parameters

.

As shown in Table II

- 3

, VMT for the future analysis year increases 37 percent
from 3.3 0 billion VMT in 2007 to 4. 51 billion VMT in 2025 within the
nonattainment area

. Despite the growth in VMT, emissions of the most significant vehicle

- related precursor, NO X , are significantly lower in the future

a nalysis year

. The emissions shown in Table II

- 3 do not include a transportation conformity safety margin, which will be discussed later in this document. See

, S ection III

- B relating to motor vehicle emission budgets for transportation conformity.- 16

-

Table II

- 3 : York Area VMT (Miles) and Vehicle Emissions (Tons per Yea r)

Nonroad Sources

.

Nonroad Sources in NMIM . Projected emissions for the majority of nonroad emission source categories and pollutants were estimated using the NMIM, which contains default assumptions for projected years. The NMIM estimates emission s for diesel, gasoline, liquefied petroleum gas, and compressed natural gas

- fueled nonroad equipment types and includes growth factors. Control measures due to finalized emission standards for nonroad vehicles and engines are also accounted
for in NMIM. Baseline emissions are multiplied by growth and control factors to obtain projected emissions.

Aircraft Emissions Growth. Aircraft operations were projected to future years by applying activity growth using data on itinerant (ITN) operations at airports as reported in the FAA ’ s Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) System for 2009

- 2030 (FAA 2010). The ITN operations are defined as aircraft take

- offs or landings. This information is available for approximately 3300 individual airports. Actual LTOs are reported f

or 2007 and projected LTOs are provided for all years up to
2030. New aircraft emission controls that will be used in the future were also
taken into account.

Railroad Emissions Growth. MANE VU+VA inventory development relied on AEO2010 growth projectio ns published in May 2010. There are separate projections for passenger rail and freight rail energy use. Passenger rail data from
AEO2010 Table A

- 7 was used to calculate the growth factor for 2007

- 2017 and

2007

- 2025. These growth factors were applied to inter

- city passenger train locomotives and independent commuter rail systems. For freight rail, the data
from AEO2010 Table A

- 7 was used to calculate the growth factor for 2007

- 2017
and 2007

- 2025. Freight rail annual growth factors for Class I line haul

, Class II/III line haul, and yard switch locomotives were used

.

Additional information about nonroad emission projection methodologies can also be found in Appendices C

- 2 and C

- 3, the technical support documents for the development of the 2017 and 2025 i nventories, respectively. The t able of nonroad emissions data sorted by source category is available as Appendix E

- 3.

D

. Interim Year (2017 ) Emissions

Tab le II

- 4 summarize s the emissions expected in 2017 . These emissions take activity and emissions gro wth and/or controls from 2007 into account.- 17

- Appendix C , relating to the regional emissions inventory and projection methodology , contains the technical support documents that describe the methodologies used to project the 2007 emissions to 201 7

.

Table II

- 4 : York Area Projected 2017 Emissions (Tons per Year)

*A portion of the difference between attainment year and maintenance year emissions of PM 2.5 and NO X has been set aside as a transportation conformity safety margin to accommodate unanticipated gro wth in highway vehicles. The hig hway vehicle emissions in Table II

- 4 reflect inclusion of that safety margin

.

E

. Maintenance Year (202 5 ) Emissions

Table II

- 5 summarize s the emissions expected in 2025 . These emissions take activity and emissions growth and/or controls from 2007 into account. Appendix C, relating to the regional emissions inventory and projection methodology , contains the technical support documents that describe the methodologies used to project the 2007 emissions to 2025

.

Table II

- 5: York Area Projected 2025 Emissions (Tons per Year)

*A portion of the difference between attainment year and maintenance year emissions of PM 2.5 and NO X has been set aside as a transportation conformity safety margin to accommodate unanticipated growth in highway vehicles. The highway vehicle emissions in Table II

- 5 reflect inclusion of that safety margin

.

F

. Maintenance Plan Emissions Test

To demonstrate maintenance of the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS for this area, Pennsylvania must show that the future emissio ns of PM 2.5 and its precursors will remain at levels that provide for maintenance of the PM 2.5 NAAQS for at least

10 years, taking economic, population a nd travel growth into account.

While EPA established presumptions related to PM 2.5 precursors in the P M 2.5 I mplementation R ule, Pennsylvania recognizes the court decision in Natural- 18

- Resources Defense Council v. EPA , No. 08

- 1250, 706 F.3d 428 (DC Cir. 2013)

. The court noted that PM 2.5 precursors, including ammonia and VOCs, are presumptively regulated in P M 2.5 nonattainment areas under Subpart 4 , pointing specifically to section 189(e), which applies to control of major stationary sources
of PM 10 [the court stated that PM 10 includes PM 2.5 throughout Subpart 4] ( 706 F.3d at 436, n. 7, and at 437, n. 10 )

. Ac cording to CAA Section 189(e), control requirements applicable for major stationary sources of PM 10 also apply to major stationary sources of PM 10 precursors , except where the Administrator determines that major stationary sources do not contribute signifi cantly to PM 10 levels that exceed the standard in the area; section 189(e) also requires EPA to issue guidelines regarding the application of subsection (e). Pennsylvania
assessed emissions of PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X , VOC and NH 3 for the maintenance
demonstration.

This Maintenance Plan contains an attainment year inventory for 2007 and
demonstrates that emissions of PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X and VOC , including emissions in the transportation conformity safety margin for PM 2.5 and NO X , will not be
greater in 2017 and 2025 than in the attainment year

, as shown in Table II

- 6 . T he small projected increase in NH 3 emissions does not present a concern for maintaining the NAAQS because the NH 3 emissions overall are small compared
with the SO 2 , NO X and VOC emissions, which are all projected to decline in the
York Area

.

Emissions of SO 2 are projected to decrease from 2007 to 2025 by an estimated 101,391 tons (86 percent ). Emissions of PM 2.5 , NO X and VOC also decrease from 2007 to 2025 by approximately 473 tons ( 9 percent ), 9,515 t ons ( 26 percent ), and 4,097 tons (29 percent ), respectively. Over the same time period, emissions of

NH 3 are projected to increase 215 tons ( 6 percent ). The increase in NH 3 emissions is due to anticipated growth reflected by activity factors ( s uch as

pop ulation and employment , for instance ) in the absence of any anticipated control requirements to reduce NH 3 emissions. The increase in NH 3 emissions from 2007 to 2025 does not present a concern for maintaining the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS in the York Area because t he NH 3 emissions overall are small compared
with the SO 2 , NO X and VOC emissions, which are all projected to decline in the

area . In addition, the York Area currently has an annual design value based on

2010

- 2012 monitoring data of 11.7 μ g/m 3 , which is si gnificantly lower than the 1997 NAAQS of 15 μ g/m3

.

Table II

- 6: York Area Maintenance Emissions Test

York PM 2.5 SO 2 NOx VOC NH3

2007 5,417 117,798 37,189 13,920 3,559

2017* 4,915 16,441 28,859 10,886 3,663

2025* 4,944 16,406 27,673 9,822 3,774
*A por tion of the difference between attainment year and maintenance year emissions of PM 2.5 and NO X has been set aside as a transportation conformity safety margin to accommodate unanticipated growth in highway

ve hicles. The emissions in Table II

- 6 reflect inc lusion of that safety margin.- 19

-

I II

. P ERMANENT AND E NFORCEABLE C ONTROL M EASURES

A. Permanent and Enforceable Control Measures

Because of the complexity and variability of the process of particulate matter formation, the EPA recognizes that effective contr ol measures for PM 2.5 will vary among nonattainment areas. In the EPA ’ s PM 2.5 Implementation Rule

, the EPA established general presumptive policies for assessing which PM 2.5 precursors should be evaluated for possible controls. In the I mplementation R ule , the EPA require d states to evaluate control measures for SO 2 and primary PM 2.5 in all locations. The EPA require d states to evaluate control measures for NO X unless a technical demonstration is made to show that NO X emissions from sources in the
state d o not significantly contribute to PM 2.5 concentrations in the nonattainment

area . The EPA require d states to evaluate measures for VOC and NH 3 only if a technical demonstration is made to show VOC or NH 3 emissions significantly
contribute to PM 2.5 in the nonattainment area.

The De partment recognizes the January 4, 2013

, decision of the Court of Appeals
for the D.C. Circuit, in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA , No. 08

- 1250,
706 F.3d 428 (DC Cir. 2013). In its decision, the court granted petitions for review that challenged EPA ’ s I mplementation R ule. After considering the petitions and EPA ’ s response to them, the court remanded the case to EPA to

re

- promulgate the rule pursuant to Subpart 4 of Part D of the Clean Air Act, rather than implementing i t under Subpart 1, as EPA had done ( 706 F.3d at 437 )

. Because the Court remanded rather than vacated the implementation rule, the implementation rule remain s in effect unless and until EPA rescinds it or promulgates a replacement. In any event, this main tenance plan demonstrates
maintenance of the standard consistent with the court ’ s ruling.

In general, the C ourt ’ s decision could affect an area ’ s nonattainment classification, certain deadlines, and the impacts of failing to attain timely, and could impos e a deadline for implementation of reasonably available and best
available control measures ( 706 F.3d at 436, n. 6 )

. Since the York Area is already attaining the NAAQS, however, those considerations are not relevant for this maintenance plan. The court n oted that PM 2.5 precursors are presumptively regulated in PM 2.5 nonattainment areas under Subpart 4 , pointing specifically to
section 189(e), which applies to control of major stationary sources of PM 10 [the
court stated that PM 10 includes PM 2.5 throughout Subpart 4] ( 706 F.3d a t 436,

n. 7, and at 437, n. 10 )

.

According to Section 189(e) of the CAA , control requirements applicable for major stationary sources of PM 10 also apply to major stationary sources of PM 10 precursors , except where the Administrator determines that major stationary sources do not contribute significantly to PM 10 levels that exceed the standard in
the area

. S ection 189(e) also requires EPA to issue guidelines regarding the- 20

- application of S ubsection (e) . Pennsylvania assessed emission s of PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X , VOC and NH 3 for the maintenance demonstration

.

This section describes the federal and state measures that will provide direct

PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X , and VOC emission reductions ensuring maintenance of the
standard.

A summary of the quan tity of emission reductions expected from 2007 to 2025 is
included in Table III

- 1 ( Negative valu e s indicate emission reductions.)

. The emission reduction estimates account for any anticipated growth in the activity of sources regulated by the strategy and include emissions in the transportation conformity safety margin

. Direct PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X and VOC emissions in 2025

in the York Area are anticipated to be lower than they were in 2007

. This means
that the projected growth in emissions is smaller than ant icipated emission
reductions from control measures for all pollutant s in the nonattainment area

. Each control measure is explained in greater detail in the following sections.
Ammonia emissions, as discussed in Section II

- G relating to the maintenance

em issions test, are anticipated to increase from 2007 to 2025 , but the increase does not present a concern for maintaining the NAAQS in the York Area because
the NH 3 emissions overall are small compared with the SO 2 , NO X and VOC emissions, which are all proj ected to decline in the area

.

Table III

- 1: Sum mary of Emission Reductions (Tons) from 2007 to 2025
from Control Measures

2007 to 2025 Difference PM 2.5 SO 2 NO X VOC NH3 Stationary Point Sources

- 71

- 100,587

- 507 72 1

Area Sources

- 39

- 625

- 2

- 136 264 Highway Vehicle Sources*

- 214

- 48

- 7,286

- 3,166

- 50

Nonroad Sources

- 119

- 131

- 1,720

- 868 1

TOTAL

- 443

- 101,819

- 9,824

- 4,083 215
*A portion of the difference between attainment year and maintenance year emissions of PM 2.5 and NO X has
been set aside as a transportation conformity safety margin to accommodate unanticipated growth in highway vehicles. The highway vehicle emissions in Table II I

- 1 reflect inclusion of that safety margin.

Pursuant to 40 CFR Part 51, Subpart K (relating to source surveillanc e), the SIP revision is required to provide for monitoring of the status of compliance with any rules and regulations that set forth any portion of the control strategy. These include provisions, as applicable, for:

 E missions reports and recordkeeping fo r stationary sources;

 P eriodic testing and inspection of stationary sources;

 E nforcement and complaint investigation of visible emission limitations;

 E nforceable test methods for emission limits; and

 C ontinuous emission monitoring for stationary sources.- 21

- Subpart K also requires monitoring of the implementation of transportation control measures (TCMs). There are no TCMs in this SIP revision

.

The rules and regulations for stationary sources, which are part of the control strategy for attaining and maintai ning the PM 2.5 standard, as well as the Department ’ s comprehensive permitting program requirements in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 127 and the Commonwealth ’ s SIP in 40 CFR 52.2020, meet the requirements of Subpart K. EPA has approved the Department ’ s permitting

pr ogram as part of the State Implementation Plan.

There are many examples in the Pa. Code of provisions for monitoring the status of compliance with the Department ’ s rules and regulations. For example, § 127.12(a) (relating to the content of applications) c ontain requirements for reporting and recordkeeping for plan approval applications. Similar requirements
are found in § 127.411(a) (relating to content of applications) for permit applications. Sections 145.145 and 145.146 contain the compliance
demonstra tion, reporting and recordkeeping requirements for cement kilns that enable the Department to monitor the status of compliance with the regulations in Chapter 145 Subpart C. The Department als o monitors the status of compli ance by conducting complaint inv estigations. The Department does visible emission inspections at regulated facilities and reports the results to the EPA AFS system as required under the Department ’ s grant. The Department conducts inspections
of air contamination sources in accordance w ith the Compliance Monitoring Schedule which is approved by EPA.

1. Stationary Point Sources

Background for Pennsylvania ’ s Stationary Source Permitting Programs. An owner or operator of all proposed new air contamination
sources in the Commonwealth are required to receive a plan approval (pre

construction permit) from the Department prior to the construction, assembly, installation of new sources, modification of any existing stationary air contamination sources, or the installation of air pollution

cont rol equipment or devices. Following the construction of the new facility or air contamination source, the owner or operator must obtain an operating permit from the Department. The type of operating permit will depend on the quantity of regulated polluta nts emitted from the air
contamination sources. DEP will issue a “ State

- only Operating Permit ” for minor air contamination stationary sources that are below the applicability thresholds for Title V facilities. A Title V operating permit is required for m ajor facilities that have the potential to emit air contaminants exceeding the Title V thresholds. The Title V Permit, which is issued for a term of five years, incorporates all applicable requirements for the facility in a single federally enforceable op erating permit.- 22

- The requirements contained in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 127 (relating to the construction, modification, reactivation and operation of sources), and
associated definitions in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 121.1, are a suite of

programs regulating air con tamination sources to improve and maintain air quality. Chapter 127 establishes requirements for the submission, review and approval of pre

- construction and operating permits for both major and

non

- major air contamination sources. The provisions of Chapt er 127 have
been codified in the SIP at 40 CFR § 52.2020(c)(1) at various times since May 31, 19 72 and most recently on October 5, 2012, and are therefore all federally enforceable. Several aspects of Chapter 127 are highlighted below as being particularly important for the maintenance of the PM 2.5 standard.

Title V Permitting Program. The Title V Permitting Program, adopted pursuant to the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, is applicable to major stationary sources as defined in 25 Pa. Code Section 121.1. The purpose
of the Title V program is to detail a facility ’ s air quality requirements in a single permit document so that industry, the regulatory agency, and the public know exactly what regulations and requirements apply and how the facility ’ s owner o r operator will monitor and demonstrate compliance with all applicable requirements

. The Title V permit includes all sources at a site including all air pollution control devices as well as activities that

were determined to be insignificant sources of em issions. Each source is
described in detail within a section of the Title V permit. Th e requirements include general conditions applicable to all Title V facilities

, emission restrictions, detailed monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements to assure compliance with the facility ’ s applicable federal
and state requirements

.

Nonattainment New Source Review and Prevention of Significant
Deterioration. Major facilities proposed in Pennsylvania will also be subject to New Source Review (NSR) requi rements in nonattainment areas and Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) requirements in areas of the Commonwealth designated attainment for National Ambient Air Quality Standards including carbon monoxide, particulate matter (PM), lead, nitrogen d ioxide (NO2), ozone and sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ). Generally, NSR permit requirements are applicable to a facility located in a nonattainment area for a particular pollutant with a potential to emit

50 tons or more per year (tpy) of volatile organic compounds or 100 tpy or

more of NOx, SO 2 , PM or carbon monoxide. It should be noted that the entire Commonwealth, included in the Ozone Transport Region by operation of law, is treated as a “ moderate ” ozone nonattainment area, irrespective of the area ’ s attainment status. Because NO X and VOC are precursors of PM 2.5 , NO X and VOC emission reductions required statewide under the nonattainment NSR program for ozone also allow Pennsylvania to make substantial progress in attaining and maintaining the- 23

- PM 2.5 NAAQS. Any m ajor stationary source or major modification subject to the NSR requirements must receive a plan approval. To receive approval from the Department, a person must show that the proposed source will, among other things, offset its potential to emit air

cont aminants including NO X , PM and VOCs by securing emission reductions credits at the specified offset ratio, will employ the “ l owest achievable emission rate” (LAER) for each regulated pollutant and conduct an alternative analysis. The nonattainment NSR req uirements are
codified in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 127, Subchapter E and approved as a SIP
revision on December 9, 1997 (62 FR 64722).

The PSD program is a pre

- construction review and permitting program applicable to new or modified major stat ionary sources su bject to Title I,

Parts C and D of the federal CAA. The PSD requirements are applicable to major sources in areas attaining the NAAQS. The federal PSD regulations codified in 40 CFR Part 52 are incorporated by reference in their entirety in 25 Pa. Code § 127.83 (relating to adoption by reference). The Department ’ s PSD regulations, codified in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 127, Subchapter D, were approved by the EPA on August 21, 1984 and
codified at 40 CFR § 52.2058 (49 FR 33128 ). PSD permit requirements may apply to a facility located in an attainment area for a standard with the potential to emit 100 tpy or 250 tpy of the six criteria pollutants including
carbon monoxide , lead, nitrogen dioxide , ozone, particulate matter and
sulfur dioxide depending on the source category. Any major stationary source or major modification subject to the PSD requirements must conduct an analysis to establish the best available control technology (BACT). In addition, the owner or operator of a facility needs to conduct an ambient air quality analysis, analyze the impacts to soils, vegetation and visibility and make sure th at the project will not adversely impact mandatory federal Class I areas including national parks greater than

6

, 000 acres and national wilderness areas and national memorial parks greater than 5

, 000 acres.

Best Available Technology Program. The Depart ment ’ s Best Available Technology (BAT) Program ensures that new stationary sources will prevent, reduce or control emissions of air contaminants to the maximum degree possible. The Department determines BAT requirements on a

case

- by

- case basis for both ma jor and minor stationary sources taking into account energy, environmental and costs. Pursuant to 25 Pa. Code § 127.1, the emission of air pollutants from new sources in Pennsylvania

must be controlled to the maximum extent, consistent with the best
availa ble technology as determined by the Department as of the date of issuance of the plan approval for the new source. Under 25 Pa. Code §127.12(a)(5), an application for a plan approval must show that the
emissions from a new source will be the minimum attai nable through the use of the best available technology. Pennsylvania regulations define- 24

- “ best available technology ” in 25 Pa. Code § 121.1 as, “ Equipment, devices, methods or techniques as determined by the Department which will prevent, reduce or control emissions of air contaminants to the maximum degree possible and which are available or may be made
available. ” The Department ’ s BAT regulations, codified in 25 Pa. Code §§ 127.1 and 127.12(a)(5), were approved by EPA on July 30, 1996, and
codified in the SIP at 40 CFR §52.2020(c)(1).

NO X and SO 2 Control Programs

. In 1998, EPA promulgated the NO X SIP Call as the EPA ’ s principal effort to reduce interstate transport of air pollution ( 63 FR 57356 ; October 27, 1998 ) . In response to the federal

NO X SIP call rule, Pennsylvania adopted the NO X Budget Trading Program regulations for EGUs and large industrial boilers , with emission reductions to commence May 1, 2003. The regulations were approved by

EPA as a revision to the Commonwealth ’ s SIP on August 21, 2001 (66 FR 43795). A dditionally, in response to the NO X SIP Call, Pennsylvania adopted additional NO X control regulations covering cement plants and internal combustion engines, with emission reductions to commence May 1, 2005. These regulations were approve d by EPA as a SIP revision on September 29, 2006 ( 71 FR 57428).

Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). In 2005, EPA adopted CAIR (70 FR 25162 ; May 12, 2005, as amended) to address interstate transport
of NO X and SO 2 . CAIR is now being implemented in Pennsylv ania through the Department ’ s CAIR regulation, codified in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 145, Subchapter D, with related amendments in Chapters 121,
129 and 145. EPA approved Pennsylvania ’ s CAIR SIP revision on
December 10, 2009, codified at 40 CFR §52.2020(c)(1) ( 74 FR 65446)

. In the CAIR SIP revision, Pennsylvania terminated the NO X Budget Trading Program and transitioned to the federal CAIR for large el ectric generating units (EGU).

The market

- based CAIR is designed to reduce EGU emissions of NO X and

SO 2 below 2002 levels throughout the eastern United States

. Pennsylvania and the other CAIR states were required to adopt a regulation implementing the requirements of the CAIR or an equivalent program. The large EGUs in Pennsylvania were initially regulated under CAIR FIPs promulgated by EPA, but have been regulated under the SIP since EPA approved Pennsylvania ’ s CAIR SIP revision. Under the SIP revision, Pennsylvania participates in the EPA

- administered cap

- and

- trade programs for NO X annual, NO X ozone season, an d SO 2 annual emissions.

EPA ’ s CAIR was remanded to EPA for revisions by the United States Court of Appeals for the D istrict of Columbia on December 23, 2008 ( See,
North Carolina v. EPA , 531 F.3d 896, modified, 550 F.3d 1176 (D.C. Cir. 2008) ) . Following r emand, EPA replaced CAIR with the- 25

- Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), but in a separate legal challenge the court vacated CSAPR. In that ruling, the court ordered EPA to continue administering CAIR pending the promulgation of a valid replacement ( See, EME Homer City Generation L.P. v. EPA , 696 F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2012, rehearing denied, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 1623 and 1624 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 24, 2013) )

. On June 24, 2013

, the Supreme Court of the United States accepted review of the case. Following the Circu it Court ’ s direction, CAIR remains in place pending the Supreme Court ’ s review.

NO X Budget Trading Program limits on non

- EGUs. The CAIR SIP
revision also established emission limits for the non

- EGUs and other units that were subject to the Commonwealth ’ s NO X Budget Trading Program
but are not subject to the CAIR NO X Ozone Season Trading Program.

T hese units must continue monitoring NO X emissions and must meet an emissions cap. Each unit has an allowable emission rate, calculated by January 31 of each ye ar, based on the previous ozone season ’ s heat input.
If the combined NO X ozone season emissions from all of these units exceed the statewide ozone season emission cap of 3,438 tons, each unit
that exceed s its individual allowable emissions limit for that ozone season must surrender to the Department one CAIR NO X ozone season allowance
and one CAIR NO X annual allowance for each ton of emissions over its
allowable limit. In addition, the Commonwealth has set aside 181 tons of

NO X , including tons that will b e retired each year to compensate for sources that were exempted under the “ twenty

- five ton exemption ” in
section 145.4(b) 3. The balance of tons remaining in the set aside is available to the Department annually for accounting corrections. The

Commonwea lth retires any unused amount from this set aside each year.

It is unlikely that the 3,438

- ton statewide NO X ozone season emission
limitation will be exceeded. Pennsylvania ’ s non

- EGU sources ’ total emissions during each of the years they were trading und er the NO X Budget Trading Program never exceeded the statewide cap of 3,438 tons.

The Department ’ s regulation, codified in 25 Pa. Code §145.8(d), was approved by EPA as a SIP revision on December 10, 2009

, and codified at 40 CFR §52.2020(c)(1).

Cement ki lns and large stationary internal combustion engines. The
CAIR SIP revision also i ncluded regulations updating the cement manufacturing and large stationary internal combustion engine regulation s that were adopted pursuant to the NO X SIP Call . Until 2009 , cement kilns and large stationary internal combustion engines that were subject to the

NO X SIP Call were required to surrender NO X SIP Call allowances if they
exceeded their NO X emission limits set forth in Department regulations. Because the Department discontinued the NO X Budget Trading Program beginning 2009, at which point NO X SIP Call allowances were replaced- 26

- by CAIR NO X ozone season allowances, the Department modified the regulations to require surrender of CAIR NO X ozone season and CAIR

NO X annual allowances for emission limit exceedances.

The Department ’ s regulations for large stationary internal combustion engines a nd cement kilns, codified in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 145, Subchapters B and C, respectively, were approved by EPA as a SIP
revision on D ecember 10, 2009

, and codified at 40 CFR § 51.2020(c)(1). An amendment to the Department ’ s regulation for cement kilns to reduce

NO X emissions effective April 15, 2011, codified in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 145, Subchapter C, was subsequently approved by EPA as a SIP
revision on July 19, 2011

, and codified at 40 CFR §51.2020(c)(1).

PPL Brunner Island Emission Controls. PPL installed SO 2 controls including scrubbers and electrostatic precipitators at the PPL Brunner Island power plant in 2009, resulting in much lower SO 2 emissions from that facility. The Title V permit (67

- 05005) for the PPL Brunner Island facility is federally enforceable and contains conditions for Units 1, 2
and 3 related to the flue gas desulfurization system and emission limits for PM, SO 2 and NO X

.

Federal Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. Federal standards to control hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) require Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) at units located at major source s of HAPs.
The EPA has promulgated a series of M ACT regulations that are applicable to sources in Pennsylvania. These MACT standards are adopted and incor porated by reference in Section 6.6 of Pennsylvania ’ s Air Pollution Control Act and implementing regulations in 25 Pa. Code § 127.35 (relating to maxi mum achievable control technology standards for hazardous air pollutants)

. The standards are also included in federally
enforceable plan approvals and operating permits issued by the

De partment for affected sources.

2

. Highway Vehicle Sources

Even with increases in VMT t hat occur from 2007 through 2025

, highway
vehicle emissions will continue to decrease . As more vehicles subject to cleaner new car standards replace older vehicles subject to less stringent new vehicle standards, the fleet as a whole emi ts fewer emissions, compensating for the incr ease in vehicle miles traveled. These decreases can be attributed to the programs des cribed below.

Federal Motor Vehicle Control Programs (FMVCP) and Pennsylvania Clean Vehicle Program for passenger vehicles a nd light

duty trucks and cleaner gasoline. Tier 1 tailpipe standards established by the CAA Amendments of 1990 include NO X and VOC limits for light

-- 27

- duty gasoline vehicles (LDGVs) and light

- duty gasoline trucks (LDGTs).
The phase in of the se standards beg an in 1994. Evaporative VOC emissions were reduced in gasoline

- powered cars starting with M odel

Y ear (MY) 1998.

In 1998, under the authority of section 177 of the CAA, the Department adopted the Pennsylvania Clean Vehicles Program (28 Pa. B. 5973 , Dec. 5, 1998)

. The Pennsylvania Clean Vehicles Program incorporates by
reference certain California Low Emission Vehicle (CA LEV) emission standards for passenger cars and light

- duty trucks. As required under
Section 177 of the CAA, these provisions are identic al to the low emission standards adopted by California

. T he regulation does not incorporate by reference the California zero emissions vehicle (ZEV) or emissions control warranty systems statement provisions.

In the same rulemaking, the Department adopte d the National Low Emission Vehicle (NLEV) program as a compliance alternative to the Pennsylvania Clean Vehicles Program. The NLEV program became effective in the Ozone Transport Region (OTR) in 1999. Pennsylvania ’ s New Motor Vehicle Emissions Control P rogram regulations in 25 Pa.
Code Sections 126.401

- 126.441, in addition to including the Clean Vehicles Program, allowed automobile manufacturers to comply with
NLEV instead o f the CA LEV program through MY 2005. These regulations affected vehicles 6,000 pounds and less.

In 1999, the EPA promulgated regulations more stringent than NLEV ( Tier 2), starting with MY 2004 (65 FR 6698 ; Feb

. 10, 2000)

. T he NLEV program was replaced for MY 2004 and l ater by the more stringent Tier 2 regulations, and vehicle manu facturers operating under the NLEV program became subje ct to the Tier 2 requirements.

Pennsylvania amended the former New Motor Vehicle Emissions Control Program in 2006. The Clean Vehicles Program continues to incorporate
the California Low Emission Veh icle Program by reference. As amended, the program affects MY 2008 and newer passenger cars and light

- duty
trucks vehicles ( 36 Pa

. B

. 7424 ; Dec

. 9, 2006 ) , corrected

37 Pa. B. 209 (Jan. 12, 2007, eff. Dec. 9, 2006)

. EPA approved Pennsylvania ’ s Clean Vehic le Program as a revis ion to the
Commonwealth ’ s SIP o n January 24, 2012 ( 77 FR 3386).

Heavy

- Duty Diesel Control Programs. The EPA promulgated more stringent national regulations for heavy

- duty en gines and vehicles (over 14,000 pounds) starting with MY 200 4. In addition, federal consent decrees with seven of the largest heavy

- duty engine manufacturers required, among other terms, that diesel engines made by these companies- 28

- comply with these 2004 standards two model years early, in MY 2002.
The emission re ductions from these programs are reflected in the future year emission inventories, as provided in the MOVES model.

In 2002, the Department adopted the Heavy

- Duty Diesel Emissions Control Program for model years starting after May 2004. The program
incor porates California standards by reference and requires MY 2005 and subsequent new heavy

- duty diesel highway engines to be those certified by California. California standards we re more stringent than federal standards for the two model years between expira tion of the consent
decrees discussed above (MYs 2005 and 2006 ) and the implementation of more stringent federal standards affecting MY 2007 and beyond. However, EPA ’ s MOVES model already assumed that the engines would comply with consent decree standards , even without an enforcement mechanism. The Department has used MOVES defaults to calculate
emissions from MY 2005 and 2006 highway engines.

The EPA adopted new emission standards for heavy

- duty engines and
vehicles for MY 2007 and subsequent. For dies el engines, the standards

were phased in from 2007 to 2010 for NO X and VOCs. For gasoline engines, the standards were phased in during MY 2008 and 2009. Federal
and California standards were virtually identical for MY 2007. For

MY 2008, California adopt ed requirements for idling restriction engine programming and an option al “ clean NO X idle ” standard. However, there
is no EPA

- approved methodology to estimate emission reductions from this requirement. Therefore, the emission estimates use assumptions of
the federal rule for MY 2007 through 2010

.

Because the new engine standards are adversely affected by sulfur in fuel,
the EPA also require d most highway diesel fuel to contain no more than
15 parts per million (ppm) of sulfur , beginning in the fall of 20 06. There

was a temporary compliance option allowing refiners to continue to produce up to 20 percent of their highway diesel fuel at 500 ppm fuel until

2010. The Department u sed MOVES defaults to estimate the effects of the phase

- in provision.

Vehicle Emission Inspection/Maintenance Program. In early 2004, Pennsylvania expanded its Vehicle Emission Inspection/Maintenance (I/M) Program into the York Area . The program applies to gasoline

powered vehicles 9,000 pounds and under, model years 1975 and newe r. For vehicles 1996 and newer, the program consists of an annual on

- board diagnostics test and a gas cap pressure test. For subject vehicles 1995 and older, the program consists of an annual visual inspection of pollution control devices to ensure they are present, connected and the proper type for the vehicle and a gas cap pressure test. These regulations can be found
in 67 Pa. Code Chapter 177. The Department submitted the expanded- 29

- emissions program as a SIP revision on December 1, 2003. EPA approve d
the SIP revision on October 6, 2005 (70 FR 58313 ).

Low Sulfur Gasoline

. Sulfur is a natural component in crude oil that ends up in gasoline and diesel unless removed. Sulfur in gasoline impairs the effectiveness of emission control systems and contrib utes to air pollution. By removing most sulfur from gasoline, new advanced emission controls will work longer and more efficiently, and air pollution
will be reduced.

The 1999 federal Tier 2 regulations (65 FR 6698; Feb. 10, 2000) reduce d
the sulfur cont ent of gasoline by up to 90 percent , enabling the use of new emission control technologies in cars and trucks that reduce harmful air pollution. The emission inventory analysis in this Maintenance Plan uses the default assumptions provided in MOVES2010 to account for the implementation of the federal standards for low sulfur gasoline. Requirements for use of low

- sulfur gasoline enabled use of advanced emission control systems in light

- duty vehicles beginning in model year

2004. Vehicles meeting Tier 2 em ission standards are 77 to 95 percent
cleaner than earlier models.

On May 21, 2013 , EPA proposed a rulemaking reducing sulfur content in gasoline further with a Tier 3 Low Sulfur Gasoline program and establishing ta ilpipe and evaporative emission standard s for motor vehicles including passenger cars, light

- duty trucks, medium

- duty passenger vehicles, and certain heavy

- duty vehicles (78 FR 29816 ). The

pre

- publication version of the final rule was signed by the EPA
Administrator on March 3, 2014

. These fed eral standards will take effect

60 days after the final rule is published in the Federal Register. The
Tier 3 program requires the annual average content of sulfur in gasoline to
be reduced to 10 parts per million , starting January 1, 2017. By 2018,

EPA estimates that SO 2 emissions will be reduced by 56 percent

. When fully implemented, this program, by 2030, will increase the effectiveness
of vehicle emission controls even further and reduce onroad emissions of

NO X by 25 percent , direct particulate matte r by 10 percent and VOC s by

1 6 percent

. The rule will also significantly reduce emissions of carbon monoxide and hazardous air pollutants including acrolein, benzene, formaldehyde and acetaldehyde.

3

. Nonroad Sources

The EPA has adopted a series of reg ulations affecting new diesel

- powered ( “ compression ignition ” ) and gasoline

- powered ( “ spark ignition ” ) nonroad engines of various sizes (horsepower) and applications. Information on these federal rules, including their implementation dates, can be found a t www.epa.gov/nonroad. The Department used the assumptions built into- 30

- the nonroad model (NONROAD2005) and NMIM to estimate emissions for all milestone years.

While the EPA has published a notice of proposed rulemaking for more stringent standards for loc omotives and large commercial marine diesel engines, the agency has not finalized any new standards.

On June 29, 2004, EPA adopted a rule establishing a comprehensive national program to reduce emissions from nonroad diesel engines (69 FR 38958). The rul e phased in requirements for reducing the sulfur content of diesel used in nonroad diesel engines. The reduction in fuel
sulfur content prevent s damage to the more advanced emission control systems needed to meet the engine standards; it will also reduce fine particulate emissions from diesel engines. In 2007, fuel sulfur levels were limited to 500 ppm for nonroad applications other than ocean

- going marine vessels. In 2010, fuel sulfur levels were reduced to the same sulfur concentration as in highway fu e l, 15 ppm; this requirement began applying in 2012 to locomotive and marine diesel fuel. EPA ado pted
technical a mendments to the program in rules published in the Federal Register on November 22, 2005 (70 FR 70498) and May 1, 2006 (71 FR 25706). On Apri l 30, 2010 (75 FR 22896), EPA adopted changes to the nonroad diesel fuel program to allow for the production and sale of diesel fuel with up to 1

, 000 ppm sulfur for use in Category 3 marine vessels. This requirement does not impact the York Area because t he
York Area does not have emissions from commercial marine vessels.

4

. Stationary Area Sources

Low Sulfur Fuel Oil. The Environmental Quality Board has adopted a
rule to reduce the sulfur content of fuel oil in Pennsylvania . This final rule, published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin February 9, 2013 (43 Pa. B. 806), corrected April 20 , 2013 (43 Pa. B. 2140), will limit the
sulfur content of No. 2 fuel oil to 500 ppm, No. 4 fuel oil to 2,500 ppm and Nos. 5 and 6 fuel oils to 5,000 ppm. Compliance with the l ower sulfur content limits will be req uired beginning July 1, 2016. The Department
estimates statewide SO 2 emission reductions of approximately 25,000 tons per year from this rule. These emission reductions will allow the
Commonwealth to attain and maint ain the PM 2.5 standards and improve visibility. The final

- form regulation was submitted to EPA for approval as a SIP revision on February 26, 2013 and determined by EPA on March 28, 2013 to be administratively complete. On February 20, 2014, EPA proposed approval, as a revision to SIP , Pennsylvania ’ s regulation for the

“ Control of Commercial Fuel Oil Sulfur Limits for Combustion Units ” ( 79 FR 9701). Action on the final SIP revision is expected this summer

.- 31

- Consumer Products. This regulation applies st atewide to any person who sells, supplies, offers for sale, or manufactures certain consum er products on or after January 1, 2005, for use in the Commonwealth. The program is contained in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 130, Subchapter B. It was
submitted to the EPA as a SIP revision on March 26, 2003

, and approved
on December 8, 2004 (69 FR 70895). Amendments to the Consumer
Products regulations were adopted on October 11, 2008

, submitted to the

EPA for approval as a SIP revision on March 11 , 2009

, and approved by
EPA as a SIP revision on October 18, 2010 (75 FR 63717)

.

Adhesives , Sealants, Primers and Solvents. Pennsylvania adopted a regulation in 2010 to control VOC emissions from Adhesives, Sealants, Primers and Solvents. This regulation was published in the P ennsylvania
Bulletin on December 25, 2010 (40 Pa. B. 7340) and approved by EPA as a SIP revision on September 26, 2012 (77 FR 59090).

B

. Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for Transportation Conformity

Section 176 of the CAA provides a mechanism by which fede rally funded or approved highway and transit plans, programs, and projects are determined not to produce new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS. EPA regulations issued to implement transportation

co nformity provide that motor vehicle emission “ budgets ” establish caps of these emissions that cannot be exceeded by the predicted transportation system emissions in the future. Transportation agencies in Pennsylvania are responsible for making timely tran sportation conformity determinations. The responsible agency in the York Area is the York Area Metropolitan Planning Organization

, the designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) under federal transportation planning requirements.

In this Mainten ance Plan, Pennsylvania establish es budgets for highway
emissions for direct PM 2.5 and NO X in order to ensure that transportation emissions do not impede clean air goals in the next decade and beyond. The highway emission budgets include a safety margin, which was created by setting aside a portion of the difference between attainment year and maintenance year
emissions of PM 2.5 and NO X to accommodate unanticipated growth in highway
vehicles.

Amendments to the 40 CFR part 93 transportation conformity regu lations to
address the 1997 PM 2.5 standard were published in the Federal Register on May 6, 2005 (70 FR 24280)

, to account for PM 2.5 and its precursors. 4 The

I mplementation R ule did not amend these regulations. Section 93.102 requires

4 The Federal transportation conformity regulations were again amended on March 14, 2012 (77 FR 14979) to
restructure several sec tions so that they apply to any new or revised NAAQS and make several c larifications to improve implementation.- 32

- conformity determin ations to be applicable to direct emissions of PM 2.5 and NO X (unless a determination is made that transportation

- related emissions are not significant contributors to PM 2.5 ), but to emissions of SO 2 , VOC, and NH 3 only if a finding is made that transportati on

- related emissions of these pollutants are significant contributors to PM 2.5

. EPA approved Pennsylvania ’ s SIP revision establishing transportation conformity requiremen ts in the Commonwealth on April 29, 2009 (74 FR 19451).

T his SIP revision establish es motor vehicle emission budget s for PM 2.5 and NO X

. The information in Table III

- 2, once the EPA approves it for purposes of conformity, will establish transportation conformity budgets for the York Area.

Table III

- 2 : Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets ( Tons per Year)

York PM 2.5 NO X 2007 358 10,684

2017 Predicted 167 4,900 Safety Margin 25 490 2017 Budget 192 5,390

2025 Predicted 125 3,089 Safety Margin 19 309 2025 Budget 144 3,398

The highway emission budgets include a safety marg in to accommodate unanticipated growth in highway vehicles. The safety margins were created by setting aside a portion of the difference between attainment year and maintenance year emissions of PM 2.5 and NO X

. Table III

- 3 shows that the amount of emissio n reduction s anticipated between 2007 and 2017 and between 2007 and 2025 easily accommodates the safety margins granted.

Table III

- 3 : Comparison of Saf ety Margin to Total Anticipated
Emission Reductions in 2017 and 2025

York PM 2.5 NO X 2007 5,417 37,1 89

2017 4,890 28,369

2025 4,925 27,364

2007

- 2017 527 8,819 Margin Granted 25 490

2007

- 2025 492 9,824 Margin Granted 19 309- 33

- For informational purposes, DEP analyzed the projected 2025 inventory and found that highway emissions of VOC, NH 3 , and SO 2 account for 16.75 percent

, 2.95 percent , and 0.18 percent of the total projected 2025 inventory, respectively,
as shown in Table III

- 4

.

Table III

- 4 : Comparison of 2025 On

- Road Mobile VOC
, NH 3 , and
SO 2 Emissions to the Total Projected 20 25 Inventory

York SO 2 VOC NH 3 On

- Road Mobile Source Projected Inventory (Tons) 30 1,645 111 Total Projected 2025 Inventory (Tons) 16,406 9,822 3,774 Percent of Total Projected 2025 Inventory (%) 0.18 16.75 2.95

The motor vehicle emission budget s include PM from vehicle exh aust, brake wear, and tire wear, which are estimated by the MOVES model. The Department
has included direct PM 2.5 re

- entrained road dust emissions from paved and unpaved roads in the area source inventory , not in the motor veh icle emission budgets. Appendix B

- 2, relating to area source annual emissions, contain s estimates of the PM 2.5 emissions attributable to paved and unpaved roads.

The York monitoring site includes a monitor that measures PM 2.5 mass and a speciation monito r that collects data on the chemical constituents of PM 2.5 in the
York Area

. Transportation construction

- related fugitive dust emissions are not a significant contributor to the PM 2.5 concentrations observed at the York monitor

. At the York monitor, the crustal component was found to be small compared to other components of PM 2.5 ( See, Figure 1 ). Given that construction

- related fugitive dust is one of many source categories contributing to the crustal material observed at the monitor, and transportation construction is a small subset of all construction, it is reasonable to conclude that transportation construction

- related fugitive emissi ons are insignificant.- 34

- Figure 1. Pie Chart of 2007 York Speciation Data

I V

. A MBIENT A I R Q UALITY M ONITORING N ETWORK

The Commonwealth will continue to operate the air monitoring network in accordance
with 40 CFR Part 58 to verify the attainment status of the York A rea for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS , with no reductions in the number of sites from t hose in the existing network unless pre

- approved by EPA. The Commonwealth has concurrently submitted to EPA a request for redesignation of the York A rea that contains analysis of ambient air quality
data and related factors.

V

. V ERIFICATION OF C ONTINUED A TTAINMENT

The Commonwealth will track the attainment status of the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS in the
York A rea by reviewing air quality and emissions data during the maintenance period. The Commonwealth will perform an annual evaluation of two key factors, VMT da ta and emissions reported from stationary sources, and compare them to the assumptions about these factors used in this plan. The Commonwealth will also evaluate the periodic (every three years) emission inventories prepared under EPA ’ s Air Emiss ion Repor ting Requirements (40 CFR 51

, Subpart A) to see if they exceed the attainment year inventory (2007 ) by more than 10 percent . Based on these evaluations, the Commonwealth will consider whether any further emission control measures should be implemented. York Percentage of Total Mass
Year 2007

Nitrate

15%

Sulfate

26%

Ammonium

14% Organic carbon

24% Elemental carbon

6% Crustal component

4% Other

11%- 35

-

VI

. C ONTINGENCY M EASURES

The Commonwealth will adopt and expeditiously implement corrective actions , as necessary and appropriate, in the following circumstances:

A first level response will be prompted if the annual mean PM 2.5 concentration exceeds
15.5 μ g/m 3 in a single calendar year within the maintenance area or if the periodic emissions inventory for the York Area exceeds the attainment year inventory (2007) by
more than 10 percent . The first level response will consist of a study to determine
wheth er the PM 2.5 value indicates a trend toward higher PM 2.5 values and whether emissions appear to be increasing. If there appears to be an increasing trend, the study
will evalu ate whether the trend is likely to continue and, if so, the necessary and

approp riate control measures to reverse the trend. Implementation of necessary and appropriate controls would take place as expeditiously as possible.

A second level res ponse will be prompted if the 2

- year average of the annual mean PM 2.5 concentrations exceed s 15.0 μ g/m 3 within the maintenance area. If this trigger point occurs, the Commonwealth will evaluate whether additional emission control measures should be implemented in order to prevent a violation of the air quality standard. The Department will ana lyze the conditions leading to the PM 2.5 levels and evaluate what measures might be most effective in correcting the PM 2.5 levels. The Department will also analyze the potential emissions effect of federal, state and local measures that have been adopted but not yet implemented at the time the second level response is triggered

. The Department will then begin the process of adop ting any selected measures that are necessary and appropriate so that in the event of a violation, the measures can be implemente d as expeditiously as practicable.

If a violation of the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS occurs, the Commonwealth will propose and adopt additional emission reduction measures , as necessary and appropriate, as expeditiously as practicable in accordance with the implemen tation schedule in this
section , the CAA, the Pennsylvania Air Pollution Control Act , other Pennsylvania statutory requirements, and the Department ’ s Policy for Development, Approval and Availability of Regulations in order to return the area to attainment with the standard.

Additional emission reduction measures to be considered for adoption if a violation of the NAAQS occurs in the York Area would be based on criteria including the following :

 air quality analysis indicating nature of violation [cause, l ocation, source];

 emission reduction potential, including extent to which emission generating sources occur in the nonattainment area;

 timeliness of implementation in terms of the potential to return the area to attainment as expeditiously as practicable; and

 costs, equity and cost

- effectiveness.- 36

-

Additional emission reduction measures the Department would consider pursuing for promulgation if a violation of the NAAQS occurs in the York Area include the following :

Regulatory measures :

 A regulation based o n the OTC Model Rule to update requirements for consumer products ;

 A regulation based on the Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) for industrial cleaning solvents ; and

 Other regulatory measures identified base d on the above

- listed criteria.

Non

- regulatory measures:

 Voluntary diesel projects:

o Diesel retrofit (including replacement, repowering or alternative fuel use) for public or private local onroad or offroad fleets;

o Idling reduction technolo gy for Class 2 yard locomotives; and

o Idling reduction technolog ies or strategies for truck stops, warehouses and

ot her freight

- handling facilities.

 Promotion of a ccelerated turnover of lawn and garden equipment, e specially commercial equipment.

 Additional promotion of alternative fuel s for fleets, home heating and agr icultural

use.

Once the Department ’ s Bureau of Air Quality has obtained an approved request to initiate a rulemaking, the rulemaking may proceed as follows:

Within 2 months: Review by Air Quality Technical Advisory Committee (AQTAC), Citizens Advisory C ouncil and other advisory committees

, 5 as appropriate.
Within 5 months: Environmental Qual ity Board (EQB) meeting/action.
Within 7 months: Publi cation in the Pennsylvania Bulletin for c omment as proposed rulemaking.
Within 9 months: Public hearing takes place and comment period on proposed
rule closes.
Within 10 months : Independent Regulatory Review Commission (IR RC) comment on proposed rule.
Within 12 months: AQTAC, Citizens Advisory Council and other advisory
committee s, as appropriate, review respon ses to comme nts and draft final rulemaking.
Within 15 months: EQB meeting/action.
Within 16 months: IRRC action on final rulemaking.
Within 17 months: Attorney General review/acti on. Within 18 months: Publi cation in the Pennsylvania Bulletin as final r ulemaking
and submi ssion to the EPA as a SIP revision. The regulation would become effective upon publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin

.

5 Other committees could include the Small Business Compliance Advisory Committee and Agriculture Advisory
Committee.- 37

- ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AEO Annual Energy Outlook AQTAC Air Quality Technical Advisory Committee

BACT Best Ava ilable Control Technology

BAT Best Available Technology

CAA Clean Air Act

CAIR Clean Air Interstate Rule

CA LEV California Low Emission Vehicle (program)

CF Control Factor

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CMU Carnegie Mellon University

CMV Commercial Marine Vessel

DEP Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

EDMS Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System

EGAS Economic Growth Analysis System

EGU Electric Generating Unit

EIA Energy Information Administration

EIS Emission Inventory System

EPA The U ni ted S tates Environmental Protection Agency EQB Environmental Quality Board

ERC Emission Reduction Credit

ERTAC Eastern Regional Technical Advisory Committee

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

FIP Federal Implementation Plan

FIRE Factor Information Retriev al

FMVCP Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program

FR Federal Register

FRM Federal Reference Method

HAP Hazardous Air Pollutant

I/M Inspection and Maintenance

IRRC Independent Regulatory Review Commission

ITN Itinerant

LDGV Light Duty Gasoline V ehicles

LDGT Light Duty Gasoline T rucks

MACT Maximum Achievable Control Technology

MANE

- VU Mid

- Atlanti c/ Northeast Visibility Union

MARAMA Mid

- Atlantic Regional Air Management Association

MOVES Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator

MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization

MY M odel Year NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standard

NAICS North American Industry Classification System

NEI National Emissions Inventory

NH 3 Ammonia

NLEV National Low Emission Vehicle (program)- 38

-

NMIM National Mobile Inventory Model

NO X Oxides of Nitrogen

NSR New Source Review OTAQ Office of Transportation and Air Quality

OTC Ozone Transport Commission

OTR Ozone Transport Region

OWB Outdoor Wood

- fired Boiler

PennDOT Pennsylvania Department of Transportation

PM Particulate Matter

PM 2.5 Particulate Matter les s than 2.5 microns in diameter or Fine P articulates

PM 10 Particulate Matter less than 10 microns in diameter

PSD Prevention of Significant Deterioration

RWC Residential Wood Combustion

SCC Source Classification Code

SIP State Implementation Plan

SO 2 Sulfu r Dioxide

TAF Terminal Area Forecast

TCM Transportation Control Measures

TSD Technical Support Document μg/m 3 M icrogram per cubic meter

μm Micrometer

VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled

VOC Volatile Organic Compound

WOE Weight of Evidence

ZEV Zero Emissions Vehicle

# C ommonwealth of Pennsylvania



# REQUEST FOR REDESIGN ATION
AS ATTAINMENT
YORK NONATTAINMENT AREA
1997 FINE PARTICULAT E MATTER
NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY

STANDARD S

APRIL 2014

Bureau of Air Quality Pennsylvania Department of Environmental P rotection

P.O. Box 8468 Harrisburg, PA 17105

- 8468

717

- 787

- 9495

www.dep.state.pa.us[ This page intentionally left blank

. ]i Table of Contents

I. Demonstration of Attainment and Ai r Quality Trends Analysis

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

A. Design Value Determination

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

B. Air Quality Trends Analysis

................................ ................................ ................... 4
C. Climate Trends Analysis

................................ ................................ ......................... 7
1. Temperature Trends

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

2. Precipitation Trends

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

D. Additional Trends

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

1. Population Trends

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

2. Economic Trends

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

E. Modeling Analyses

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

II. SIP Approvals and Applicable Requirements

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

A. Se ction 110(a)(2) of the CAA

................................ ................................ ............... 15

B. Part D

- Plan Requirements for Nonattainment Areas

................................ .......... 16

1. Section 172(c) of the CAA

................................ ................................ ....... 16

2. Section 173 of the CAA

................................ ................................ ............ 16
3. Section 176 of the CAA

................................ ................................ ............ 17

4. Section 189( e) of the CAA

................................ ................................ ....... 17
C. Conclusion

................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 18

III. Demonstration of Permanent and Enforceable Improvement

................................ ............ 18

A. Baseline (2005) Emissions Inventory

................................ ................................ ... 19

B. Attainment Year (2007) Emissions Inventory

................................ ...................... 20
C. C ontrol Measures

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 22

1. Stationary Point Sources

................................ ................................ ........... 23

2. Highway Vehicle Sources

................................ ................................ ......... 28
3. Nonroad Sources

................................ ................................ ....................... 31

4. Stationary Area Sources

................................ ................................ ............ 32

IV. Maintenance Plan

................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 33ii T able of Tables

Table I

- 1: York Area Annual PM 2.5 Concentrations

................................ ................................ ...... 5
Table I

- 2: York Area 98th % of 24

- Hour PM 2.5 Concentrations

................................ ................... 5
Table I

- 3: York Area Annual PM 2.5 Design Values

................................ ................................ ...... 6
Table I

- 4: York Area 24

- Hour PM 2.5 Design Values

................................ ................................ ..... 7
Table I

- 5: York Area Monthly Mean Temperature (°F)

................................ ................................ 8
Table I

- 6: York Area Precipitation (inches)

................................ ................................ ................ 10
Table I

- 7: EPA’s Transport Rule Modeling Results for the PM 2.5 Standard for

Pennsylvania Sites

................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 14
Table III

- 1: York Area 2005 Annual Emissions (Tons per Year)

................................ ............... 20
Table III

- 2: York Area 2007 Annual Emissions (Tons per Year)

................................ ............... 21
Table III

- 3: Change in York Area Annual Emissions (Tons per Year) from 2005 t o 2007

........ 23
Table III

- 4: Summary of Emission Totals (Tons) in 2007, 2017 and 2025

................................ . 23

Table of Figures

Figure I

- 1: Pennsylvania’s 1997 PM 2.5 Nonattainment Areas

................................ ....................... 3 Figure I

- 2: PM 2.5 Annual Concentration Trend

................................ ................................ ............. 5 Figure I

- 3: PM 2.5 98th Percentile Concentration Trend

................................ ................................ . 6 Figure I

- 4. Pie Chart of 2007 York Speciation Data

................................ ................................ ..... 7 Figure I

- 5. York Area Monthly Mean Temperature (°F)

................................ ............................... 9 Figure I

- 6: York Area Annual Precipitation (inches)

................................ ................................ .. 10 Figure I

- 7: York Area Population Trend

................................ ................................ ..................... 11 Figure I

- 8: York Area Population and Labor Force Trends

................................ ........................ 12 Figure I

- 9: Pennsylvania and National Coincident Indexes from the Phila delphia Reserve

Bank

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 13- 1

- INTRODUCTION

Particulate matter (PM) is a mixture of microscopic solids and liquid droplets suspended in air
that include: acids (such as nitrates and sulfates), organic chemicals, metals, soil o r dust particles and allergens (such as fragments of pollen or mold spores). Fine particle pollution or PM 2.5 describes particulate matter th at is less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers (μm) in diameter, approximately 1/30th the diameter of a human hair. Because of their small size, fine particles can penetrate deeply into the lungs.

Health studies have shown a significant association between exposure to fine particles and

p remature death from heart or lung disease. Fine particles can aggravate heart and lung diseases and have been linked to effects such as cardiovascular symptoms, cardiac arrhythmias, heart attacks, respiratory symptoms, asthma attacks, and bronchitis. The se effects can result in increased hospital admissions, emergency room visits, absences from school or work, and restricted activity days. Individuals that may be particularly sensitive to fine particle exposure include people with heart or lung disease, older adults, and children. The article, “ Fine

Particulate Air Pollution and Life Expecta ncy in the United States ” by C. Arden Pope, III, et al. published January 22, 2009 in the New England Journal of Medicine evaluated the role PM 2.5 reductions occurrin g in the 1980s and 1990s had on the increased life expectancy observed over that period. The study found that a reduction of 10 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m 3 ) of PM 2.5 was associated with an average increase in life expectancy of 7.3 months.

PM 2.5 has significant environmental impacts, including acid rain and stream eutrophication.

PM 2.5 also affects visibility (regional haze ) through the scattering and absorption of light. Fine particles, similar in size to the wavelength of light, are most efficient, per unit of mass, at reducing visibility. Soiling and materials damage can also be caused by PM 2.5 in the air.

The United S tates Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued PM 2.5 national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) in 1997 after evaluating hundreds of health studies and conducting an extensive peer review process. The EPA established an annual primary (health

- base d) and secondary (welfare

- based) standard of 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m 3 ), based on the

3

- year average of annual mean PM 2.5 concentrations. The EPA also established a primary and secondary 24

- hour standard of 65 μg/m 3 determined by the 3

- year a verage of the 98th percent ile
of 24

- hour concentrations.

On December 17, 2004, the EPA issued air quality designations for the PM 2.5 standard based on air qu ality monitoring data from 2001

- 2003. The final designations were published in the Federal Regist er on January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944). The designations became effective on April 5, 2005. On April 5, 2005, the EPA issued a supplemental notice changing the designation of certain areas from nonattainment to attainment based on newly available air quality data (70 FR 19844; April 14, 2005). The April 5, 2005

, supplemental notice only affected Mercer County in th e Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

The York Area was one of eight areas in Pennsylvania, comprising all or parts of

21 Pennsylvania counties, designa ted by the EPA as nonattainment for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS.
The York Area, consisting of York County in Pennsylvania, was designated by EPA as- 2

-

nonattainment because it violated the 1997 annual standard of 15.0 μg/m 3 based on 2001

- 03 monitoring data. The York Area did not violate the 1997 24

- hour standard of 65 μg/m 3

.

The subsequent analyses described in this Request for Redesignation clearly demonstrate that the ambient air quality in the York Area now meets t he 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS and that the emission
reductions responsible for the air quality improvement are both permanent and enforceable. These analyse s and the maintenance plan submitted concurrently demonstrate that the York Area has completed all criteria s et forth in Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and should be officially redesignated as attainment.

Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA states that an area may be redesignated to attainment if the following conditions are met:

 The NAAQS has been attained ( discussed in Section I ) ;

 The applicable implementation plan has been fully approved under Section 110(k) of the
CAA and the state has met all applicable requirements for the area under Section 110
and Part D ( discussed in Section II ) ;

 The impr ovement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions ( discussed in Section I and Section III ) ; and

 A Maintenance P lan with contingency measures has been fully approved under
Section 175A ( discussed in Section IV )

.

This Reque st for Redesignation describes how the York Area satisfies each of the C AA ’ s Section 107(d)(3)(E) criteria for redesignation to attainment.

Requirements for a public comment process are set forth in Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA,

40 CFR Section 51.102(d) a nd Section 7.5 of the Pennsylvania Air Pollution Control Act.
35 P.S. Section 4007.5 (b)

. On January 25, 2014, t he Department provided not ice of a public comment period and the opportunity for a hearing on the Maintenance Plan, 2007 comprehensiv e inventor y required by Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA, and this Request for Redesignation. The public comment period closed February 28 , 2014 . The Department scheduled the public hearing

to occur on February 26 , 2014

, but no persons expressed interest in presenting testimony or attending. Therefore, the Department cancelled the hearing. Comments were received from one commentator and have been addressed in a Comment and Response document.- 3

-

I. D EMONSTRATION OF A TTAINMENT AND A IR Q UALITY T RENDS

A NALYSIS

On Decembe r 17, 2004, the EPA issued air quality designations for the 1997 PM 2.5 standard based on air qu ality monitoring data from 2001

- 2003. The final designations were published in the Federal Register on January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944). The designations became eff

ective on April 5, 2005. On April 5, 2005, the EPA issued a supplemental notice changing the designation of certain areas from nonattainment to attainment based on newly available air quality data (70 FR 19844; April 14, 2005). The April 5, 2005 suppleme ntal notice only affected Mercer County in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Commonwealth or Pennsylvania ).

The York Area was one of eight areas in Pennsylvania, comprising all or parts of

21 Pennsylvania counties, designated by the EPA as nonattainment f or the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS. The York Area, consisting of York County in Pennsylvania, was designated as
nonattainment because it violated the 1997 annual standard of 15.0 μg/m 3 based on

2001

- 03 monitoring data. The York Area did not violate the 1997 24

- hour standard of
65 μg/m 3

.

Figure I

- 1: Pennsylvania ’ s 1997 PM 2.5 Nonattainment Areas

Air quality in the York Area has improved since the EPA ’ s original designations. The
York Area ’ s annual PM 2.5 design value has decreased over the 2001 to 201 2 time frame.
The York Area ’ s design value for 2003 (based on data from 2001 through 2003 ) was 17.0 μ g/m3. The York Area ’ s 201 2 design value (b ased on data from 20 10 through

201 2 ) was 11.7 μ g/m3 . Following EPA criteria, a PM 2.5 design value below 15.0 μ g/m3- 4

-

is considered to be attainment. Concentrati ons are expected to remain lower than
15 μ g/m3 over the next decade.

On September 25, 2009

, the EPA determined that the York Area had attained the 1997

PM 2.5 NAAQS ( “ Clean Data Determination ” ) (74 FR 48863) . EPA ’ s C lean D ata
D etermination was based on quality

- assured, quality

- controlled and certified ambient air monitoring data that show the area has mon itored attainment based on 20 06 through 2008 data. This final action suspended the requirements for this area to submit attainment demonstrations and associated reasonably available control measures, reasonable further progress plans, contingency measures and other planning State Imp lementation Plan ( SIP ) revisions related to the attainment of the NAAQS for so long as the area continues to attain the NAAQS.

The determination of attainment did not “ redesignate ” the area as “ attainment. ” The
York Area remains nonattainment for the 199 7 PM 2.5 NAAQS until the Commonwealth submits, and EPA approves, a Request for R edesignation and a Maintenance Plan showing the area can mainta in the standard for at least 10 years.

A. Design Value Determination

The ambient air quality analysis is based o n PM 2.5 data measured at the York County monitoring site. The ambient air quality data analysis for PM 2.5 was completed using the appropriate regulations and guidance documents. Monitoring procedures were determined in accordan ce with 40 CFR Part 58

. Th e PM 2.5 design values were calculated in accordance with 40 CFR Part 50, Appendix N,

“ Interpretation of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate

Matter. ”

B

. Air Quality Trends Analysis

This section provides a brief summary of PM 2.5 moni toring concentrations in the
York Area.

Trends in PM 2.5 design values were analyzed from 2001 through 2012. Table I

- 1 displays annual PM 2.5 concentrations monitored in the York Area. Table I

- 2
contains the 98 th percentile o f 24

- hour concentrations for each year. The 2001 through 2012 trend lines for annual concentrations and 98 th percentile of 24

- hour

conc entrations are shown in Figures I

- 2 and I

- 3. As shown in Figures I

- 2 and I

- 3, the slope of the trend lines for the annual and 24

- hour PM 2.5 concent rations are both negative, indicating decreasing concentrations. The slopes of the annual
mean and the 24

- hour concentrations indicate declines of 0.62 and 1.93 μ g/m 3 per year, respectively, over the 2001 through 2012 timeframe.- 5

- Table I

- 1: York Area Ann ual PM 2.5 Concentrations

Annual Mean

Site 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Hill St

42

- 133

- 0008 16.7 17.1 17.4 16.4 18.0 14.4 15.8 13.6 11.7 11.3 11.6 12.0

Table I

- 2: York Area 98th % of 24

- Hour PM 2.5 Concentrations

An nual 98% Concentration

Site 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Hill St

42

- 133

- 0008 41.3 52.8 47.0 35.9 39.4 35.1 37.0 32.3 26.6 29.7 28.0 28.4

Figure I

- 2 : PM 2.5 Annual Concentration Trend- 6

- Figure I

- 3: PM 2.5 98th Percentile Concentration Trend

Tables I

- 3 and I

- 4 contain the York Area ’ s annual and 24

- hour PM 2.5 design values calculated from the 2001 through 201 2 monitoring data.

Design values for the annual PM 2.5 NAAQS show a steady declining trend. The
York Area was de signated as nonattainment based on the 2001 through 2003 annual design value of 17.0 μ g/m3. The 24

- hour design value for that time period

was 47 μ g/m3. Compared with the 2001 through 2003 design values, t he annual design value for 20 10 through 20 1 2 has d ecreased by 31 percent and the 24

- hour design value by 38 percent

. The annual and 24

- hour PM 2.5 design values for the
York Area are shown below in Tables I

- 3 and I

- 4, respectively.

Table I

- 3 : York Area Annual PM 2.5 Design Values

1997 Annual PM 2.5 NAAQS = 15 ug/m3

Design Value

Site 1999

-

2001 2000

- 2002 2001

- 2003 2002

- 2004 2003

- 2005 2004

- 2006 2005

- 2007 2006

- 2008 2007

- 2009 2008

- 2010 2009

- 2011 2010

- 2012

Hill St

42

- 133

- 0008 16.3 16.8 17.0 16.9 17.3 16.3 16.0 14.6 13.7 12.2 11.5 11.7- 7

- Table I

- 4 : York A rea 24

- Hour PM 2.5 Design Values

1997 24

- Hour PM 2.5 NAAQS 3 year 98% = 65 ug/m3

Design Value

Site 1999

-

2001 2000

- 2002 2001

- 2003 2002

- 2004 2003

- 2005 2004

- 2006 2005

- 2007 2006

- 2008 2007

- 2009 2008

- 2010 2009

- 2011 2010

- 2012

Hill St

42

- 133

- 0008 39.0 45.0 47.0 45.0 41.0 37.0 37.0 35.0 32.0 30.0 28.0 29.0

C

. Climate Trends Analysis

PM 2.5 formation in the eastern United States is a complex process involving local and regional meteorology, topography, chemistry and transport. Sulfates and
nitrates are form ed primarily through atmospheric reactions of precursor
emissions of sulfur dioxide ( SO 2 )

, oxides of nitrogen ( NO X ) and ammonia ( NH 3 )

. Organic carbon is a combination of secondary organic particles formed from
emissions of volatile organic compounds ( VOC ) and the organic portion of primary PM 2.5 that is directly emitted or condenses near its source. Currently, our understanding of sulfate and nitrate chemistry and its impacts on PM 2.5 concentrations far exceeds our understanding of contributions from anth ropogenic VOCs. This is important because sulfates, nitrates , ammonium and organic carbon are major contributors to the total PM 2.5 , making up approximately

79 percent of the annual PM 2.5 concentration observed in the York Area in 2007.

Figure I

- 4

. Pie Chart of 2007 York Speciation Data

Attainment of the PM 2.5 NAAQS involves the range of meteorological conditions throughout the year. PM 2.5 chemistry favors sulfate formation during the warm
summer months and nitrate formati on during the colder winter months. In York Percentage of Total Mas s Year 2007

Nitrate

15%

Sulfate

26%

Ammonium

14% Organic carbon

24% Elemental carbon

6% Crustal component

4% Other

11%- 8

- addition, local temperature inversions more common in the winter can concentrate emissions near the surface, leading to periods of elevated PM 2.5 concentrations.

To assess whether it is likely that unusual meteorolo gical patterns have
contributed to the lower PM 2.5 concentrations observed in the York Area, temperature and precip itation trends over the last 10 years were examined.

The data used in the trends analysis is from the Global Historical Climatology
Network (GHCN) database for the Lancaster Airport, which was judged to be more representative meteorologically of the York Area overall than the York Airport site. The monthly summary data was obtained from the NOAA National
Climatic Data Center at: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo

web/search#t=secondTabLink

1. Temperature Trends

Table I

- 5 presents monthly mean temperature data for the York A rea for 2001 through 2012 . Figure I

- 5 graphicall y displays the data.

Table I

- 5: York Area Monthly Mean Temperature ( ° F)

Lancaster Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

2001 27.9 33.6 37.6 50.9 61.0 71.1 71.1 75.2 64.0 54.9 48.0 39.4

2002 35.2 37.0 41.9 54.0 59.9 71.6 76.6 75.6 67.5 52.3 4 1.7 30.0

2003 24.6 25.9 40.3 49.5 57.6 67.6 73.9 74.7 65.8 51.6 47.5 33.8

2004 23.5 31.5 43.3 52.3 66.9 68.5 73.0 71.6 67.5 53.4 45.7 34.5

2005 29.1 32.9 36.7 53.1 56.8 72.9 75.6 75.7 70.0 55.9 45.9 30.7

2006 38.8 32.5 42.1 53.4 61.0 70.5 76.3 74.5 63. 5 52.7 47.5 39.9

2007 35.1 25.0 40.3 48.0 63.3 71.8 72.9 73.0 67.5 60.8 42.3 34.2

2008 32.5 32.2 41.4 52.5 57.2 72.7 74.1 70.3 66.2 52.3 42.3 34.3

2009 25.0 33.1 40.5 51.4 61.7 69.3 71.1 74.1 64.2 52.7 48.0 32.7

2010 30.4 28.9 46.6 54.1 64.2 73.8 77.4 74.7 68.5 54.5 43.7 30.0

2011 25.9 32.7 40.5 54.0 64.8 72.3 78.6 73.2 67.5 53.6 47.3 39.0

2012 34.7 37.4 49.8 51.1 66.4 70.7 78.1 74.3 65.5 55.0 40.1 38.8- 9

- Figure I

- 5. York Area Monthly Mean Temperature (°F)

The York Area was designated nonattainme nt for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS
based on 2001 through 2003 data. The summer of 2001 appears to have been a slightly cooler than normal summer while the winter of 2002 was milder than normal. Neither of these conditions would be expected to cause higher PM 2.5 concentrations as was experienced during that
timeframe. The York Area ’ s C lean D ata D etermination was based on

2006 through 2008 data, and the York Area has monitored attainment since that time. Examination of the temperature data from 2006 through

2012 shows normal variation in seasonal temperatures but no evidence of unusual patterns that would be expected to repress PM 2.5 formation.

2. Precipitation Trends

Table I

- 6 presents monthly and annual precipitation data for the York

A rea for 2001 through 20 12 . Figure I

- 6 graphically displays the annual precipitation data.- 10

- Table I

- 6: York Area Precipitation (inches)

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual

Total

2001 2.1 1.7 4.0 2.2 3.2 1.8 1.1 4.5 4.3 0.7 0.9 1.5 27.9

2002 2.5 0.3 3.6 3 .4 5.6 3.5 1.1 3.5 3.1 7.8 3.8 4.3 42.4

2003 1.5 3.0 3.3 2.6 4.4 6.0 2.6 3.6 8.7 4.6 3.8 2.4 46.3

2004 1.7 2.8 1.7 5.9 3.2 5.7 7.2 5.6 5.8 2.0 3.6 3.1 48.1

2005 3.3 1.5 3.6 4.2 1.1 5.7 7.0 1.5 0.8 8.1 3.0 3.0 42.7

2006 3.9 1.6 0.9 4.1 2.5 13.1 3.6 1.2 6.0 3.4 6.0 2.2 48.3

2007 2.1 1.8 3.0 4.4 1.3 4.2 5.1 4.3 1.0 5.3 2.7 3.8 39.0

2008 0.9 4.7 3.1 1.0 3.7 2.7 6.6 1.3 4.9 2.2 1.5 3.4 36.0

2009 1.8 0.8 1.5 4.1 4.4 4.6 2.2 6.0 4.2 5.8 1.5 4.3 41.2

2010 1.4 1.8 3.1 1.9 3.9 1.4 6.1 1.5 7.9 3.6 2.1 2.0 36.5

2011 1.5 2.9 4.2 6.4 5.2 4.6 1.7 6.7 13.1 3.5 4.3 3.1 57.1

2012 2.1 2.1 1.1 1.8 3.8 4.1 3.7 1.4 6.1 7.2 1.1 3.2 37.8

Figure I

- 6 : York Area Annual Precipitation (inches)

Examination of the 2001 through 2003 precipitation data indicates both
drier and wetter than usual year s within the timeframe. Examination of the precipitation data from 2006 through 2012 also shows variation in precipitation amounts. Throughout these years the York Area monit ored
attainment of the standard. There is no indicati on from the data that
unusual precipitation patterns contribute d to the lower PM 2.5 concentrations in recent years in which the York Area monitored
attainment of the PM 2.5 NAAQS

.- 11

-

D

. Additional Trends

1. Population Trends

The York Area

, which consists of York County

, has had significant population growth over the last decade

. York County ’ s population
increased approximately 14 percent between the 2000 and 2010 Censuses. According to the Bureau of the Census, York County ’ s 20 10 population

wa s 434,972 peo ple, ranking the county eighth largest in population in Pennsylvania.

Population increases correspond with increased emissions from some types of emission sources and

, therefore

, can result in increased pollution
levels. While York County ’ s population ha s grown approximately

1 4 percent over the last decade, t his growth has not resulted in increased

PM 2.5 concentrations. In fact, the county ’ s PM 2.5 concentrations have declined in spite of the increase in population.

Figure I

- 7 : York Area Population Tren d

2. Economic Trends

Economic trends could have impacts on emissions and consequently affect

PM 2.5 concentrations in the York Area . The two factors considered here include estimated labor force changes in York County and overall economic activity in Pennsylvania as measured by the Coincident Index.
The labor force data was obtained from the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Mid

- Atlantic Information Office. The Coincident Index data was obtained from the Philadelphia Reserve Bank

.- 12

- Figure I

- 8 shows York County ’ s population change and estimated labor force change since 1980. A larger labor force could lead to more driving and increased infrastructure demands. This in turn could lead to higher emissions. Increases in the county ’ s labor force also contribute to overall increases in economic activity (greater family income/spending). The Philadelphia Federal Reserve Bank has tracked economic activity in Pennsylvania over the last 25 years. Pennsylvania ’ s Economic Activity
Index is graphically depicted in Figure I

- 9. In spite of these upward trends, air quality continues to improve in York County

.

Figure I

- 8 : York Area Population and Labor Force Trends

Data Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Mid

- Atla ntic Information Office The database containing “ State and local industry employment and earnings

- monthly ” data was accessed from the following site: http://www.bls.gov/ro3/data.htm- 13

- Figure I

- 9: Pennsyl vania and Nat ional Coincident Indexes

from the Philadelphia Reserve Bank

Data downloaded on 5/24/2012 from: The Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia at: http://www.philadelphiafed.org/research

- and

- data/regional

- economy/indexes/coincident/

The Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia produces a monthly coin cident
index for each of the 50 states. The coincident indexes combine four

state

- level indicators to summarize current economic conditions in a single
statistic. The four state

- level variables in each coincident index are nonfarm payroll employment, average hours worked in manufacturing, the unemployment rate, and wage and salary disbursements deflate d by the consumer price index (U.S. city average). The trend for each state ’ s index is set to the trend of its gross domestic product (GDP), so long

- term growth in the state ’ s index matches long

- term growth in its GDP.

E

. M odeling Analyses

Modeling resu lts for the EPA ’ s Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule ( 76 FR 48207 ; August 8, 2011) 1 ( Transport Rule ) were examined to determine if the model results support redesignating the York Area to attainment. EPA ’ s analysis
indicates that the York Area would attain t he 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS, even in the
absence of either the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) or the Transport Rule.

EPA used the Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extension (CAMx)
version 5.3. CAMx is a three

- dimensional Eulerian grid

- based photochemical

m odel designed to simulate the formation, chemical transformation, transport, and removal of ozone, secondary and directly emitted PM 2.5 , and their precursor species on national, regional, and local scales for short

- term episodes up to annual

1 “ Federal Implementation Plans: Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone and Correction of SIP Approvals

. ”- 14

- time periods. Using this model, EPA simulated the emissions from many different sources of pollution ( such as electric generating units (EGU)

, and mobile sources). All of the Transport Rule CAMx simulations used meteorology for
2005 derived from simulations of the Pen nsylvania State University/ National Center for Atmospheric Researc h Mesoscale Model (MM5) version 3.7.4. The
2005 emissions of SO 2 , NO X , VOC, NH 3 and direct PM 2.5 were modeled. The modeling was based on the annual PM 2.5 design values for the 2003 through 2007 base period.

EPA outlined the model results in the Air Quality Modeling Final Rule Technical Support Document for the Transport Rule. Air quality modeling was performed
to simulate ozone and PM 2.5 concentrations for the 2005 base year, a 2012 “ no C AIR ” base case, a 2014 “ no CAIR ” base case, and the 2014 remedy scenario.
Table I

- 7 displays the results of EPA ’ s analysis for the York Area. EPA ’ s analysis indicates that the York Area would attain the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS, even
in the absence of either CAI R or the Transport Rule. The results support redesignating the York Area to attainment for the PM 2.5 NAAQS.

Table I

- 7 : EPA ’ s Transport Rule Modeling Results for the PM 2.5 Standard for Pennsylvania Sites

PM 2.5 Design Values (μg/m 3 )

Site ID County For m of

Standard 2003

- 2007

Average
Ambient

Values 2003

- 2007

Maximum
Ambient

Values 2012 Base

Case Average

Values 2012 Base

Case
Maximum

Values 2014 Base

Case Average

Values 2014 Base

Case
Maximum

Values

421330008 York Annual 16.52 17.25 14.01 14.63 13.64 14. 24

421330008 York 24

- Hour 38.2 40.7 33.3 36.0 32.6 35.3

Source: Air Quality Modeling Final Rule Technical Support Document for the Transport Rule ( http://www.epa.gov/airtransport/pdfs/A QModeling.pdf )

I I

. SIP A PPROVALS AND A PPLICABLE R EQUIREMENTS

In order for EPA to redesignat e a nonattainment area to attainment, the applicable SIP revision must be fully approved under Sect ion 110(k) of the CAA. In addition, the state
must have met a ll requirements applicable to the area under CAA Section 110 and

Part D

- Plan Requirements for Nonattainment Areas. The specific requirements applicable to the York Area can be found in sections 110(a)(2), and Part D
sections 172(c) (relating to nonattai nment plan provisions) , 173 (relating to permit requirements) and

, 176 (relating to limitations on certain federal assistance)

. A court has also recently held that EPA must implement the PM 2.5 NAAQS pursuant to Subpart 4 of

Part D

- see section III below for more information.

These requirements have been fulfilled for the York A rea.- 15

-

A. Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA

Section 110(a) of the CAA contains the general requirements for a SIP. Pennsylvania concludes that, as EPA has stated in previous rulemakin g in another

state [1] , only the S ection 110 and P art D requirements that are linked with a particular area ’ s designation are the relevant measures to consider in evaluating a redesignation request. Further, Pennsylvania believes that the other section 110 elements that are not connected with nonattainment plan submissions and not
linked with an area ’ s attainment status are also not applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation. A state remains subject to these requirements after an area is redesig nated to attainment.

The requirements of CAA S ection 110(a)(2) that are statewide requirements and
that are not linked to the PM 2.5 nonattainment status of the York Area are not applicable requirements for purposes of review of the Commonwealth ’ s PM 2.5

re designation request. However, EPA requires that the Commonwealth ’ s Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) requirements be approved prior to redesignation, because PSD requirements will apply after redesignation.
Sections 110(a)(2)(C) and 110(a)(2) (J) of the CAA require state plans to meet the requirements of CAA, Subchapter I, Part C, which contains PSD requirements. In
addition , Section 110(a)(2)(I) requires that a plan revision for an area designated as a nonattainment area meet the applicable r equirements of CAA, Subchapter I,

Part D (relating to nonattainment areas). Therefore, Pennsylvania has concluded that only the parts of Sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(I) and 110(a)(2)(J) that
relate to Part D applicable requirements or PSD are applicab le for purposes of redesignation.

EPA has previously approved provisions of Pennsylvania ’ s SIP addressing
section 110 requirements, including provisions addressing PM 2.5

. Pennsylvania ’ s SIP measures meeting section 110(a)(2)(C) and 110(a)(2)(J) requireme nts are fully approved under section 110(k) of the CAA. The Maintenance Plan associated with this Request for Redesignation for the York Area is a SIP revision for an area designated as a nonattainment area and meets the applicable requirements of P art D of Subchapter I of the CAA ; therefore, the Maintenance Plan associated with this Request for Redesignation me ets the requirements of
Section 110(a)(2)(I). Please see the discussion below concerning Part D (plan requirements for nonattainment areas)

.

[1] See EPA ’ s proposed approval of Ohio ’ s redesignation request for the Ohio portion of the Huntington

- Ashland
nonattainment area for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS (76 FR 79593). On December 31, 2012, EPA published final approval of O hio ’ s redesignation request for the Ohio portion of the Huntington

- Ashland nonattainment area for the
1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS (77 FR 76883).- 16

-

B

. P art D

- Plan Requirements for Nonattainment Areas

1. Sect ion 172(c) of the CAA

Section 172 of the CAA contains the general provisions required to be
included in SIP revisions for nonattainment areas. These include attainment demonstrations, reasonably a vailable control measures, reasonable further progress, inventory data, and permitting requirements.

As stated above, EPA determined on September 25, 2009 (74 FR 48863)

, that the York A rea had attained the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS . EPA based this
Clean Data Dete rmination upon complete, quality

- assured, quality

controlled, and certified ambient air monitoring data that showed that the
area monitored attainment of the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS during the 2006 through 2008 monitoring period. The Clean Data Determination

sus pended the requirements for this area to submit an attainment demonstration, associated reasonably available control measures, a reasonable further progress plan, contingency measures, and other planning SIP revisions related to attainment of the 1997 PM 2. 5 NAAQS for so long as the area continues to meet the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS.

Submittal of a comprehensive inventory is required by 40 CFR
Section 51.1008 to meet the requirements of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. This requirement was not suspended by the Clean Data
Determination

. In fulfillment of this requirement, t he 2007 inventory

, which also serves as the attainment year inventory, is being submitted as part of the Maintenance P lan, su bmitted concurrently with this Request for Redesignation

.

2

. Section 17

3 of the CAA

Section 173 of the CAA outlines requirements related to permitting of air pollution sources in nonattainment areas.

Stationary air pollution sources are subject to the regulations of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Code in Tit le 25 Environmental Resources (25 Pa. Code Chapters 121

- 145). These regulations include:

 Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources promulgated by EPA under the Clean Air Act (25 Pa. Code Chapter 122) ;

 Standards for Contaminants (25 Pa. Code Cha pter 123) ;

 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (25 Pa.
Code Chapter 124);- 17

-  Construction, Modification, Reactivation and Operation of Sources, including plan approval, prevention of significant deterioration, new source review, operatin g permit program (25 Pa. Code Chapter 127);

 Standards for Sources (25 Pa. Code Chapter 129) ; and

 Annual Emission Statements and required reporting to the Department, (25 Pa. Code Chapter 135).

These permitting, stationary source monitoring and reporting, preconstruction review, offset ratios and enforceable emission limitations requirements were adopted to implement the fed erally mandated requirements in sections 110, 172, 173 and 182(a) of the CAA. EPA has approved all of these regulations as SIP revisi ons , as indicated in
Section III of this document

.

3

. Section 176 of the CAA

Section 176 (c) of the CAA contains the provision prohibiting federal financing of projects or activities that do not conform to an approved implementation plan.

The Commonwealt h adopted and incorporated EPA ’ s G eneral C onformity rule (40 CFR Part 93, Subpart B) by reference in its entirety in 25 Pa.
Code Section 127.802 . The G eneral C onformity regulation describes procedures to determine if federally

- financed, non

- transportation projects
are in con formity with air quality plans

.

EPA and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) have issued regulations regarding criteria and procedures for demonstrating and assuring conformity of transportation improvement programs (TIP or

prog ram), long range plans (LRP or plan), and individual transportation projects with the requirements of the CAA and the SIP for the specific nonattainment area. Affected transportation planning organizations are complying with all federal laws, regulations and guidance for transportation conformity.

4

. Section 189(e) of the CAA

In light of a recent court decision, Natural Resources Defense Council v.

EPA , No. 08

- 1250, 706 F.3d 428 (DC Cir. 2013) (see discussion in
Section III), the Department considered Se ction 189(e) of the CAA

. According to section 189(e) and the court decision

, control requirements
in nonattainment areas applicable for major stationary sources of PM also apply to major stationary sources of PM precursors. Pennsylvania
assessed emission s of PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X , VOC and NH 3 for the
maintenance demonstration

. Please see Section III

- C

- 1 relating to control- 18

- measures for stationary sources for a discussion of the stationary source control measures in place in the York Area.

C. Conclusion

The r equirements of Section 110(a) and Subpart D of the CAA have been fulfilled
in the York Area

.

I II

. DEMONSTRATION OF PER MANENT AND ENFORCEAB LE IMPROVEMENT

This section provides an assessment of the PM 2.5 and PM 2.5 precursor emissions at a time
the York A re a was monitoring nonattainment of the PM 2.5 NAAQS and at the time when
this area attained the PM 2.5 NAAQS. A 2005 ( baseline ) inventory of PM 2.5 and PM 2.5 precursor emissions is used to represent emissions during the PM 2.5 nonattainment designation period. A 2007 inventory is used to identify PM 2.5 and PM 2.5 precursor emissions during the period when the York A rea demonstrated that it attained the PM 2.5 NAAQS. Detailed information is presented in the Maintenance Plan by sector.

Because of the complexity and variability of the process of particulate matter formation, the EPA recognizes that effective control measures for PM 2.5 will vary among
nonattainment areas. In the EPA ’ s Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule (72 FR 20586 ; April 25, 2007) (the I mplementation R ule), the EPA established general presumptive policies for assessing which PM 2.5 precursors should be evaluated for possible controls. The EPA require d states to evaluate control measures for SO 2 and primary PM 2.5 in all locations. The EP A require d states to evaluate control measures for

NO X unless a technical demonstration is made to show NO X does not significantly
contribute to PM 2.5 . The EPA require d states to evaluate measures for VOC and NH 3 only if a technical demonstration is made to show they significantly contribute to PM 2.5 in
that area.

The Department recognizes the January 4, 2013

, decision of th e Court of Appeals for the

D.C. Circuit, in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA , No. 08

- 1250, 706 F.3d 428 (DC Cir. 2013). In i ts decision, the C ourt granted petitions for review that challenged

EPA ’ s I mplementation R ule for the 1997 PM 2.5 standard. After considering the petitions
and EPA ’ s response to them, the Court remanded the case to EPA to re

- promulgate the rule pursuant to Subpart 4 of Part D of the Clean Air Act, rather than implementing it under Subpart 1, as EPA had done ( 706 F.3d at 437 ) . Because the Court remanded rather
than vacated the I mplementation R ule, the rule remain s in effect unless and until EPA
rescinds it or promulgates a replacement. In any event, the M aintenance P lan accompanying this Request for Redesignation demonstrates maintenance of the standard
consistent with the Court ’ s ruling.

In general, t he Court ’ s decision could affect an area ’ s nonattainmen t classification, certain deadlines, and the impacts of failing to attain timely, and could impose a deadline for implementation of reasonably available and best available control measures ( 706 F.3d

at 436, n. 6 )

. Since the York Area is already attaining the NAAQS, however, those- 19

-

considerations are not relevant for this Request for Redesignation and the M aintenance

P lan. The court noted that PM 2.5 precursors, including ammonia and VOCs, are presumptively regulated in PM 2.5 nonattainment areas under Subpar t 4 , pointing specifically to Section 189(e) , which applies to control of major stationary sources of

PM 10 [the court stated that PM 10 includes PM 2.5 throughout Subpart 4] ( 706 F.3d at 436,

n. 7, and at 437, n. 10 )

. According to Section 189(e) of the CAA

, control requirements applicable for major stationary sources of PM 10 also apply to major stationary sources of

PM 10 precursors , except where the Administrator determines that major stationary sources do not contribute significantly to PM 10 levels that exc eed the standard in the area;

S ect ion 189(e) also requires EPA to issue guidelines regarding the application of

S ubsection (e)

. Pennsylvania assessed emissions of PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X , VOC and NH 3 for
the maintenance demonstration

.

T his Request for Redesign ation provides emissions information for all pollutants ( PM 10 , PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X , VOC and NH 3 ), as required by EPA ’ s guidance entitled, “ Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards (N AAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations

. ” 2 T he section
first describes the PM 2.5 and PM 2.5 precursor emission estimates for the York A rea. The 2005 National Emission Inventory (NEI) data was used for the 2005 baseline year inventory. The 2007 inventory was developed in accordance with EPA emission inventory preparation guidance. The section then presents information about the permanent and enforceable control measures that have been implemented in the York

A rea to produce the PM 2.5 and PM 2.5 precursor emiss ion reductions that have occurred between these years and that will provide emission reductions ensuring maintenance of
the standard

.

A. Baseline ( 2005 ) Emissions Inventory

An emission inventory is an estimate of the emissions from sources in a particula r

area. The 2005 baseline year emissions inventory represents the emissions present during a time period when the York Area did not meet the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS. The Department considered using 2002 as the baseline year; however,
emissions from PPL ’ s Brunne r Island facility were uncharacteristically low in 2002, so the Department opted to use 2005 as the baseline year. The 2005 National Emissions Inventory (NEI) was the next available periodic emission inventory developed by EPA.

The 2005 NEI is a compos ite of emission estimates reported by state and local agencies and industry, as well as estimates generated by EPA. The 2005 NEI was based in part on information submitted by the Department under the Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR), which was published in the Federal Register

o n Monday, June 10, 2002 (67 FR 39602) . The CERR required States to prep are and submit a comprehensive s tatewide inventory every three years.

2 Emissions 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.- 20

- The 2005 emissions inventory data was obtained from the EPA ’ s web site for th e 2005 NEI. The data can be accessed at: http://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/net/2005inventory.html Appendix A

- 2 contains Tier 1 summary data of the 2005 NEI.

The 2005 baseline year inventory includes the pollutants PM 10 , PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X , VOC, and NH 3 . The inventory consists of sources in four sectors: e lectric

g enerating u nits (EGUs), non

- EGU point and stationary area sources, highway
vehicle sources and nonroad sources. The 2005 inventory is not directly comparable to the 2007, 2017 and 2025 inventories because of changes in inventory methodology. Highway vehicle emissions in the 2005 NEI were generated using the MOBILE6 model. For the same VMT and other parameters, the MOBILE6 model pred icts significantly lower NOx emissions than the current model, MOVES2010. In addition, MARAMA adjusted PM emissions to account for condensable PM emissions from EGUs in the 2007, 2017 and 2025 emission
inventories. This results in higher PM emissions in the 2007 inventory than were reported by facilities to the Department in 2007. Table III

- 1 summarizes the
emissions for 2005.

Table III

- 1: York Area 2005 Annual Emissions (Tons per Year)

B. Attainment Year (2007) Emissions Inventory

A 2007 inventor y of PM 10 , PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X , VOC and NH 3 emissions for the
York A rea is used to identify emissions during the period when attainment of the

PM 2.5 NAAQS was demonstrated for the York A rea. Pennsylvania and other
Northeastern and Mid

- Atlantic states particip ated in a regional effort to refine the emissions inventory and to compile a regional emissions inventory. The Mid

Atlantic Regional Air Management Association (MARAMA) coordinated that regional effort, which allowed states to pool their resources to comp ile a regional emissions inventory for the purpose of conducting the regional modeling analysis used in Pennsylvania ’ s air quality management p lanning efforts to attain the

8

- hour ozone NAAQS and the PM 2.5 NAAQS, and to prepare the Regional Haze
SIP revisi on.- 21

- The inventory contains information for these sectors:

 “ Stationary sources ” (or “ point ” sources), which are sources for which the Department collects individual emissions

- related information. Generally, they represent major stationary sources but may be smaller.

 “ Area sources, ” which are industrial, commercial, and residential sources too small or too numerous to be handled individually. These include but are not limited to commercial and residential open burning, architectural
and industrial mainte nance coatings application and clean

- up, consumer product use, and vehicle refueling at service stations. Where there is overlap between stationary point sources and stationary area sources, the area source values are adjusted to remove any double countin g.

 “ Highway vehicles, ” which include passenger cars and light

- duty trucks, other trucks, buses and motorcycles.

 “ Nonroad sources, ” which encompass a diverse collection of engines, including but not limited to outdoor power equipment, recreational
vehicl es, farm and construction machinery, lawn and garden equipment, industrial equipment, recreational marine vessels, commercial marine vessels, locomotives, ships, and aircraft.

A summary of the 2007 inventory is provided in Table III

- 2.

Table III

- 2 : York Area 2007 Annual Emissions (Tons per Year)

York 2007 PM 2.5 PM 10 SO 2 NO X VOC NH 3 Stationary Point Sources 2

, 462 3

, 556 115

, 901 22

, 164 1

, 320 80

Area Sources 2

, 394 8

, 093 1

, 684 1

, 680 5

, 956 3

, 316 Highway Vehicle Sources 358 430 78 10

, 684 4

, 810 161

Non

- Road Sources 202 214 135 2

, 660 1

, 833 2

Totals 5
, 417 12
, 292 117
, 798 37
, 189 13
, 920 3
, 559

Inventory methodology differences exist between the 2005 and 2007 emission
inventories

. Highway vehicle emissions in the 2005 NEI were generated using
the MOBILE6 model. For the same VMT and other parameters, the MOBILE6 model predicts significantly lower NOx emissions than the current model, MOVES2010. In addition, MARAMA adjusted PM emissions to account for condensable PM emissions from EGUs in the 2007, 2017 and 2025 emission
inventories. This results in higher PM emissions in the 2007 inventory than were reported by facilities to the Department in 2007. While the 2005 emissions inventory is not directly comparable to the 2007, 2017 and 2025 inventories,

PM 2.5 , SO 2 , VOC, and NH 3 emissions decreased by 36 percent , 1 percent

, 23 percent and 9 percent , respectively, from 2005 to 2007. Emissions of NO X in 2007 were 3,492 tons (10 percent ) more than in the 2005 NEI. Further- 22

- assessment shows that the increase is in the highway vehicle sector and is due to the fact that MOBILE6 was used to generate the 2005 NEI highway vehicle emission estimates while MOVES2010 was used to generate the 2007 NEI highway vehicle emission estimates. Therefore, the difference between 2005 an d

2007 NO X emissions is the result of a methodology difference rather tha n a “ real ”
emissions increase.

The Maintenance Plan describes how the 2007 inventory was compiled. The Technical Appendices to the Maintenance Plan contain more detailed information
for each sector.

C

. Control Measures

Along with the analysis of ambient air quality and c ontributing factors in
Section I of th is Request for Redesignation , this section describes the permanent
and enforceable federal and state measures that provided em ission reductions
from 200 5 to 2007 to bring the York Area into attainment and measures that will
assure maintenance of the standard

. In the EPA ’ s I mplementation R ule, the EP A established general presumptive policies for assessing which PM 2.5 precursors

s hould be evaluated for possible controls. However, the Department recognizes the January 4, 2013

, decision of the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA , No. 08

- 1250, 706 F.3d 428 (DC Cir. 2013). The court note d that PM 2.5 precursors are presumptively regulated in PM 2.5 nonattainment areas under Subpart 4 , pointing specifically to

S ection 189(e), which applies to control of major stationary sources of PM 10 [the
court stated that PM 10 includes PM 2.5 throughout Su bpart 4]

. ( 706 F.3d at 436,

n. 7, and at 437, n. 10 )

. According to CAA Section 189(e), control requirements applicable for major stationary sources of PM 10 also apply to major stationary
sources of PM 10 precursors , except where the Administrator determine s that major stationary sources do not contribute significantly to PM 10 levels that exceed the standard in the area; S ection 189(e) also requires EPA to issue guidelines regarding the application of S ubsection (e) . Pennsylvania assessed emissions of

PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X , VOC and NH 3 for the maintenance demonstration.

PM 2.5 , SO 2 , VOC and NH 3 emissions in the York Area decreased by 36 percent

, 1 percent , 23 percent and 9 percent

, respectively, from 2005 to 200 7. Emissions of NOx in 2007 were 3,492 tons (10 perc ent ) more than in the 2005 NEI. However, as discussed previously, this represents a methodology difference rather
than a “ real ” emission increase. P ermanent and enforceable reductions of direct

PM 2.5 , SO 2 and VOC emissions between 2005 and 2007 , as descr ibed in more detail
in Section III

- C , led to the improvement in air quality observed in that time period. As noted above, the decrease in PM 2.5 emissions may be a conservative estimate because the 2007 inventory was augmented to account for condensable

PM

. A summary of the quantity of emission reductions from 2005 to 2007 is
included in Table III

- 3

. (Negative values indicate emission reductions.)- 23

-

Table III

- 3 : Change in York Area Annual Emissions (Tons per Year) from 2005 to 2007

This section also d escribes the federal and state measures that will provide direct

PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X and VOC emission reductions

, ensuring maintenance of the
standard.

A summary of the total emission s in 2007 and projected estimates for 2017 and
2025 is included in Table III

- 4

. The emission estimates account for any anticipated growth in the activity of sources and include a transportation conformity safety margin for PM 2.5 and NO X . For all pollutants, except NH 3 , emissions in 2017 and 2025 in the York A rea are anticipated to be lower than they were in 2007. This means that the projected growth in emissions is smaller than anticipated emission reductions from control measures for all pollutants , except
NH 3 , in the nonattainment area. The small projected increase in NH 3 emi ssions does not present a concern for maintaining the NAAQS because the NH 3 emissions overall are small compared with the SO 2 , NO X and VOC emissions, which are all projected to decline. Each measure is explained in greater detail in the following sections

.

Table III

- 4 : Summary of Emission Totals (Tons) in 2007, 2017 and 2025

York PM 2.5 SO 2 NO X VOC NH3

2007 5,417 117,798 37,189 13,920 3,559

2017* 4,915 16,441 28,859 10,886 3,663

2025* 4,944 16,406 27,673 9,822 3,774
*A portion of the difference betwe en attainment year and maintenance year emissions of PM 2.5 and

NO X has been set aside as a transportation conformity safety margin to accommodate unanticipated growth in highway ve hicles. The emissions in Table II I

- 4 reflect inclusion of that safety margi n.

1. Stationary Point Sources

Background for Pennsylvania ’ s Stationary Source Permitting Programs. An owner or operator of all proposed new air contamination sources in the Commonwealth are required to receive a plan approval (pre

construction permit) from the Department prior to the construction, assembly, installation of new sources, modification of any existing stationary air contamination sources, or the installation of air pollution control equipment or devices. Following the construction of the n ew facility or air contamination source, the owner or operator must obtain an operating permit from the Department. The type of operating permit will- 24

- depend on the quantity of regulated pollutants emitted from the air
contamination sources. DEP will issu e a “ State

- only Operating Permit ” for minor air contamination stationary sources that are below the applicabilit y thresholds for Title V facilities. A Title V operating permit is required for major facilities that have the potential to emit air
contaminan ts exceeding the Title V thresholds. The Title V Permit, which is issued for a term of five years, incorporates all applicable requirements for the facility in a single federally enforceable operating permit.

The requirements contained in 25 Pa. Code Ch apter 127 (relating to the construction, modification, reactivation and operation of sources), and
associated definitions in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 121.1, are a suite of programs regulating air contamination sources to improve and maintain air quality. Chapt er 127 establishes requirements for the submission, review and approval of pre

- construction and operating permits for both major and

non

- major air contamination sources. The provisions of Chapter 127 have
been codified in the SIP at 40 CFR §52.2020(c)(1) at various times since May 31, 1972 and most recently on October 5, 2012, and are therefore all federally enforceable. Several aspects of Chapter 127 are highlighted
below.

Title V Permitting Program. The Title V Permitting Program, adopted
pursuant to the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, is applicable to major stationary sources as defined in 25 Pa. Code Section 121.1. The purpose
of the Title V program is to detail a facility ’ s air quality requirements in a single permit document so that industry, th e regulatory agency, and the public know exactly what regulations and requirements apply and how the facility ’ s owner or operator will monitor and demonstrate compliance with all applicable requirements. The Title V permit includes all sources at a
site i ncluding all air pollution control devices a s well as activities that

were determined to be insignificant sources of emissions. Each source is
described in detai l within a section of the Title V permit. The requirements include general conditions applica ble to all Title V facilities, emission restrictions, detailed monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements to assure compliance with the facility ’ s applicable federal and state requirements.

Nonattainment New Source Review and Prevention of Signi ficant
Deterioration. Major facilities proposed in Pennsylvania will also be subject to New Source Review (NSR) requirements in nonattainment areas and Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) requirements in areas of the Commonwealth designated atta inment for National Ambient Air Quality Standards including carbon monoxide, particulate matter (PM), lead, nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ), ozone and sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ). Generally, NSR permit requirements are applicable to a facility located in a
nonattainment area for a particular pollutant with a potential to emit
50 tons or more per year (tpy) of volatile organic compounds or 100 tpy or- 25

- more of NOx, SO 2 , PM or carbon monoxide. It should be noted that the entire Commonwealth, included in the Ozone Transport Region by operation of law, is treated as a “ moderate ” ozone nonattainment area, irrespective of the area ’ s attainment status. Because NOx and VOC are precursors of PM 2.5 , NOx and VOC emission reductions required statewide under the nonattainment NSR prog ram for ozone also allow Pennsylvania to make substantial progress in attaining and maintaining the

PM 2.5 NAAQS. Any major stationary source or major modification subject to the NSR requirements must receive a plan approval. To receive approval from the Department, a person must show that the proposed source will, among other things, offset its potential to emit air contaminants including NOx, PM and VOCs by securing emission reductions credits at the specified offset ratio, will employ the “ lowest
achiev able emission rate ” (LAER) for each regulated pollutant and conduct an alternative analysis. The nonattainment NSR requirements are
codified in 25 Pa. Chapter 127, Subchapter E and approved as a SIP
revision on December 9, 1997 (62 FR 64722).

The PSD pro gram is a pre

- construction review and permitting program applicable to new or modified major stationary sources subject to Title I,

Parts C and D of the federal CAA. The PSD requirements are applicable to major sources in areas attaining the NAAQS. The f ederal PSD regulations codified in 40 CFR Part 52 are incorporated by reference in their entirety in 25 Pa. Code §127.83 (relating to adoption by reference). The Department ’ s PSD regulations, codified in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 127, Subchapter D, were approve d by the EPA on August 21, 1984 and
codified at 40 CFR §52.2058 (49 FR 33128).). PSD permit requirements may apply to a facility located in an attainment area for a standard with the potential to emit 100 tpy or 250 tpy of the six criteria pollutants incl uding
carbon monoxide , lead, nitrogen dioxide , ozone, particulate matter and
sulfur dioxide d epending on the source category. Any major stationary source or major modification subject to the PSD requirements must conduct an analysis to establish the best available control technology (BACT). In addition, the owner or operator of a facility needs to conduct an ambient air quality analysis, analyze the impacts to soils, vegetation and visibility and make sure that the project will not adversely impact mandatory federal Class I areas including n ational parks greater than 6,000 acres and national wild erness areas and national m emorial parks greater than 5,000 acres.

Best Available Technology Program. The Department ’ s Best Available Technology (BAT) Program ensures that new stationary sources will prevent, reduce or control emissions of air contamin ants to the maximum degree possible. The Department determines BAT requirements on a

case

- by

- case basis for both major and minor stationary sources taking into account energy, environmental and costs. Pursuant to 25 Pa. Code- 26

- §127.1, the emission of air p ollutants from new sources in Pennsylvania must be controlled to the maximum extent, consistent with the best available technology as determined by the Department as of the date of issuance of the plan approval for the new source. Under 25 Pa. Code §127.1 2(a)(5), an application for a plan approval must show that the emissions from a new source will be the minimum attainable through the use of the best available technology. Pennsylvania regulations define

“ best available technology ” in 25 Pa. Code § 121.1 a s, “ Equipment, devices, methods or techniques as determined by the Department which will prevent, reduce or control emissions of air contaminants to the maximum degree possible and which are available or may be made
available. ” The Department ’ s BAT regula tions, codified in 25 Pa. Code §§127.1 and 127.12(a)(5), were approved by EPA on July 30, 1996, and
codified in the SIP at 40 CFR §52.2020(c)(1).

NOx and SO 2 Control Programs

. In 1998, EPA promulgated the NO X SIP Call as the EPA ’ s principal effort to red uce interstate transport of air pollution ( 63 FR 57356 ; October 27, 1998). In response to the federal

NO X SIP call rule, Pennsylvania adopted the NO X Budget Trading Program regulations for EGUs and large industrial boilers , with emission
reductions to com mence May 1, 2003. The regulations were approved by

EPA as a revision to the Commonwealth ’ s SIP on August 21, 2001 (66 FR 43795). Additionally, in response to the NO X SIP Call, Pennsylvania adopted additional NO X control regulations covering cement plant s and internal combustion engines, with emission reductions to

commence May 1, 2005. These regulations were approved by EPA as a SIP revision on September 29, 2006 ( 71 FR 57428).

Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). In 2005, EPA adopted CAIR (70 FR 25162 ; May 12, 2005, as amended) to address interstate transport
of NO X and SO 2 . CAIR is now being implemented in Pennsylvania through the Department ’ s CAIR regulation, codified in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 145, Subchapter D, with related amendments in Chapters 121,

1 29 and 145. EPA approved Pennsylvania ’ s CAIR SIP revision on
December 10, 2009, codified at 40 CFR §52.2020(c)(1) (74 FR 65446). In the CAIR SIP revision, Pennsylvania terminated the NO X Budget Trading Program and transitioned to the federal CAIR for lar ge e lectric generating units (EGU).

The market

- based CAIR is designed to reduce EGU emissions of NO X and

SO 2 below 2002 levels throughout the eastern United States. Pennsylvania and the other CAIR states were required to adopt a regulation implementing t he requirements of the CAIR or an equivalent program. The large EGUs in Pennsylvania were initially regulated under CAIR FIPs promulgated by EPA, but have been regulated under the SIP since EPA approved Pennsylvania ’ s CAIR SIP revision. Under the SIP- 27

- rev ision, Pennsylvania participates in the EPA

- administered cap

- and

- trade programs for NO X annual, NO X ozone season, and SO 2 annual emissions.

EPA ’ s CAIR was remanded to EPA for revisions by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia on December 23, 2008 ( See,
North Carolina v. EPA , 531 F.3d 896, modified, 550 F.3d 1176 (D.C. Cir. 2008) ) . Following remand, EPA replaced CAIR with the

Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), but in a separate legal challenge
the court vacated CSAPR. In tha t ruling, the court ordered EPA to continue administering CAIR pending the promulgation of a valid replacement ( See, EME Homer City Generation L.P. v. EPA , 696 F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2012, rehearing denied, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 1623 and 1624 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 24, 2013) )

. On June 24, 2013

, the Supreme Court of the United States accepted review of the case. Following the Circuit Court ’ s direction, CAIR remains in place pending the Supreme Court ’ s review.

NO X Budget Trading Program limits on non

- EGUs. The CAIR SI P
revision also established emission limits for the non

- EGUs and other units that were subject to the Commonwealth ’ s NO X Budget Trading Program but are not subject to the CAIR NO X Ozone Season Trading Program.

T hese units must continue monitoring NO X emis sions and must meet an emissions cap. Each unit has an allowable emission rate, calculated by January 31 of each year, based on the previous ozone season ’ s heat input.
If the combined NO X ozone season emissions from all of these units
exceed the statewid e ozone season emission cap of 3,438 tons, each unit
that exceed s its individual allowable emissions limit for that ozone season must surrender to the Department one CAIR NO X ozone season allowance
and one CAIR NO X annual allowance for each ton of emission s over its
allowable emission limit. In addition, the Commonwealth has set aside

181 tons of NO X , including tons that will be retired each year to compensate for sources that were exempted under the “ twenty

- five ton exemption ” in 25 Pa. Code § 145.4(b) 3. The balance of tons remaining in the set aside is available to the Department annually for accounting
corrections. The Commonwealth retires any unused amount from this set aside each year.

It is unlikely that the 3,438

- ton statewide NO X ozone season emi ssion
limitation will be exceeded. Pennsylvania ’ s non

- EGU sources ’ total emissions during each of the years they were trading under the NO X Budget Trading Program never exceeded the statewide cap of 3,438 tons.

The Department ’ s regulation, codified in 25 Pa. Code §145.8(d), was approved by EPA on December 10, 2009

, and codified in the SIP at
40 CFR §52.2020(c)(1).- 28

- Cement kilns and large stationary internal combustion engines. The CAIR SIP revision also included regulations updating the cement
manufactur ing and large stationary internal combustion engine regulations that were adopted pursuant to the NO X SIP Call. Until 2009, cement kilns and large stationary internal combustion engines that were subject to the

NO X SIP Call were required to surrender NO X SIP Call allowances if they
exceeded their NO X emission limits set forth in Department regulations. Because the Department discontinued the NO X Budget Trading Program beginning 2009, at which point NO X SIP Call allowances were replaced by CAIR NO X ozone s eason allowances, the Department modified the regulations to require surrender of CAIR NO X ozone season and CAIR

NO X annual allowances for emission limit exceedances.

The Department ’ s regulations for large stationary internal combustion engines a nd cement kilns, codified in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 145, Subchapters B and C, respectively, were approved by EPA on
December 10, 2009

, and codified at 40 CFR §51.2020(c)(1). An amendment to the Department ’ s regulation for cement kilns to reduce

NO X emissions effectiv e April 15, 2011, codified in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 145, Subchapter C, was approved by EPA on July 19, 2011 and
codified at 40 CFR §51.2020(c)(1).

Federal Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. Federal standards to control hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) require Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) at units located at major sources of HAPs. The EPA has issued a series of regulations that are applicable to sources in Pennsylvania. These MACT standards are adopted and incorporated by

reference in S ection 6.6 of Pennsylvania ’ s Air Pollution Control Act and implementing regulations in 25 Pa. Code § 127.35 (relating to maximum achievable control technology standards for hazardous air pollutants) and are also included in federally enforceable permits iss ued by the

De partment for affected sources.

2. Highway Vehicle Sources

Even with increases in vehicle miles travelled ( VMT ) that occurred
between 200 5 and 2007, and are anticipated to occur from 2007 through 2025, highway vehicle emissions will continue to decrease . As more vehicles subject to cleaner new car standards replace older vehicles subject to less stringent new vehicle standards, the fleet as a whole emits fewer emissions, compensating for the increase in VMT . These decreases can be
attributed t o the programs described below.

Federal Motor Vehicle Control Programs (FMVCP) and Pennsylvania Clean Vehicle Program for passenger vehicles and light

duty trucks and cleaner gasoline. Tier 1 tailpipe standards established- 29

- by the CAA Amendments of 1990 include NO X and VOC limits for light

duty gasoline vehicles (LDGVs) and light

- duty gasoline trucks (LDGTs). These standards began to be phased in 1994. Evaporative VOC emissions were reduced in gasoline

- powered cars starting with Model Year (MY)
1998.

In 1998, under the authority of S ection 177 of the CAA, the Pennsylvania Environmental Quality Board (EQB) adopted the Pennsylvania Clean Vehicles Program (28 Pa. B. 5873 ; Dec. 5, 1998). The Pennsylvania Clean Vehicles Program incorporates by reference cer tain California Low Emission Vehicle (CA LEV) emission standards for passenger cars and light

- duty trucks. As required under Section 177 of the CAA, these provisions are identical to the low emission standards adopted by California. The regulation does n ot incorporate by reference the California zero emissions vehicle (ZEV) or emissions control warranty systems statement provisions.

In the same rulemaking, the EQB adopted the National Low Emission Vehicle (NLEV) program as a compliance alternative to the Pennsylvania Clean Vehicles Program. The NLEV program became effective in the Ozone Transport Region (OTR) in 1999. Pennsylvania ’ s New Motor Vehicle Emissions Control Program regulations in 25 Pa. Code §§ 126.401

- 126.441 allowed automobile manufacturers to comply with
NLEV instead o f the CA LEV program through MY 2005. These regulations affected vehicles 6,000 pounds and less

.

In 1999, the EPA promulgated regulations more stringent than NLEV (Tier 2), starting with MY 2004. T he NLEV program was replace d for

MY 2004 and later by the more stringent Federal “ Tier 2 ” vehicle emissions regulations ( 65 FR 6698 ; Feb. 10, 2000), and vehicle manufacturers operating under the NLEV program became subje ct to the
Tier 2 requirements.

Pennsylvania amended the former New Motor Vehicle Control Program in 2006. The Clean Vehicles Program continues to incorporate the California Low Emission Vehicle Program (CA LEV II) by reference. As amended, the program affects MY 2008 and newer passenger cars and light

- duty trucks v ehicles ( 36 Pa.B

. 7424 ; Dec. 9, 2006, corrected

37 Pa. B. 209 ; Jan. 12, 2007, eff. Dec. 9, 2006). EPA approved Pennsylvania ’ s Clean Vehicle Program as a revis ion to the
Commonwealth ’ s SIP o n January 24, 2012 ( 77 FR 3386).

Heavy

- Duty Diesel Control Program s. The EPA promulgated more stringent national regulations for heavy

- duty engines and vehicles (over 14,000 pounds) starting with MY 2004. In addition, consent decrees with seven of the largest heavy

- duty engine manufacturers required, among- 30

- other terms, that diesel engines made by these companies comply with these 2004 standards two model years early, in MY 2002. The emission
reductions from these programs are reflected in the future year emission inventories, as provided in the Motor Vehicle Emission S imulator ( MOVES ) model.

In 2002, the EQB adopted the Heavy

- Duty Diesel Emissions Control Program for model years starting after May 2004. The program incorporates California standar ds by reference and requires MY 2005 and subsequent new heavy

- duty diesel highway engines to be those certified by California. California standards were more stringent than federal standards for the two model years between expiration of the consent
decrees discussed above (MYs 2005 and 2006) and the implementation of
more stri ngent federal standards affecting MY 2007 and beyond. However, EPA ’ s MOVES model already assumed that the engines would comply with consent decree standards, even without an enforcement mechanism. The Department has used MOVES defaults to calculate
emiss ions from MY 2005 and 2006 highway engines.

The EPA adopted new emission standards for heavy

- duty engines and
vehicles for MY 2007 and subsequent. For diesel engines, the standards

were phased in from 2007 to 2010 for NO X and VOCs. For gasoline engines, the standards w ere phased in during MY 2008 and 2009. Federal and California standards are virtually identical for MY 2007. For

MY 2008, California adopted requirements for idling restriction engine programming and an optional “ clean NO X idle ” standard. However, there
is no EPA

- approved methodology to estimate emission reductions from this requirement. Therefore, the emission estimates use assumptions of
the federal rule for MY 2007 through 2010.

Because the new engine standards are adversely affected by sulfu r in fuel, the EPA also required most highway diesel fuel to contain no more than
15 parts per million (ppm) of sulfur, beginni ng in the fall of 2006. There

wa s a temporary compliance option allowing refiners to continue to produce up to 20 perce nt of their highway diesel fuel at 500 ppm fuel until 2010. The Department u sed MOVES defaults to estimate the effects of the phase

- in provision.

Vehicle Emission Inspection/Maintenance Program. In early 2004, Pennsylvania expanded its Vehicle Emission Inspection/Maintenance (I/M) Program into the York Area. The program applies to gasoline

powered vehicles 9,000 pounds and under, model years 1975 and newer. For vehicles 1996 and newer, the program consists of an annual on

- board diagnostics test and a g as cap pressure test. For subject vehicles 1995 and older, the program consists of an annual visual inspection of pollution control devices to ensure they are present, connected and the proper type- 31

- for the vehicle and a gas cap pressure test. These regul ations can be found
in 67 Pa. Code Chapter 177. The Department submitted the expanded emissions program as a SIP revision o n December 1, 2003. EPA approved
the SIP revision on October 6, 2005 (70 FR 58313).

Low sulfur gasoline. Sulfur is a natural comp onent in crude oil that ends up in gasoline and diesel unless removed. Sulfur in gasoline impairs the effectiveness of emission control systems and contributes to air pollution. By removing most sulfur from gasoline, new advanced emission controls
will w ork longer and more efficiently, and air pollution will be reduc ed.

The 1999 federal Tier 2 regulations (65 FR 6698 ; Feb. 10, 2000) reduce d
the sulfur content of gasoline by up to 90 percent, enabling the use of new emission control technologies in cars a nd trucks that reduce harmful air pollution. The emission inventory analysis in the Maintenance Plan submitted concurrently with this Request for Redesignation uses the default assumptions provided in MOVES2010 to account for the implementation of the fed eral standards for low sulfur gasoline. Requirements for use of low

- sulfur gasoline enabled use of advanced emission control systems in light

- duty vehicles beginning in model year

2004. Vehicles meeting Tier 2 emission standards are 77 to 95 percent
clea ner than earlier models.

On May 21, 2013, EPA proposed a rulemaking reducing sulfur content in gasoline further with a Tier 3 Low Sulfur Gasoline program and establishing tailpipe and evaporative emission standards for motor vehicles including passenger c ars, light

- duty trucks, medium

- duty passenger vehicles, and certain heavy

- duty vehicles (78 FR 29816). The

pre

- publication version of the final rule was signed by the EPA
Administrator on March 3, 2014. These federal standards will take effect

60 days af

ter the final rule is published in the Federal Register. The
Tier 3 program requires the annual average content of sulfur in gasoline to
be reduced to 10 parts per million, starting January 1, 2017. By 2018,
EPA estimates that SO 2 emissions will be reduc ed by 56 percent. When fully implemented, this program, by 2030, will increase the effectiveness
of vehicle emission controls even further and reduce onroad emissions of NOx by 25 percent, direct particulate matter by 10 percent and VOCs by

16 percent. T he rule will also significantly reduce emissions of carbon monoxide and hazardous air pollutants including acrolein, benzene, formaldehyde and acetaldehyde.

3. Nonroad Sources

The EPA has adopted a series of regulations affecting new diesel

- powered ( “ com pression ignition ” ) and gasoline

- powered ( “ spark ignition ” ) nonroad engines of various sizes (horsepower) and applications. Information on- 32

- these federal rules, including their implementation dates, can be found at www.epa.gov/nonroad. The Department used the assumptions built into the nonroad model (NONROAD2005) and NMIM to estimate emissions for all milestone years.

While the EPA has published a notice of proposed rulemaking for more stringent standards for locomotives and large commercial marine diesel engines, the agency has not finalized any new standards.

On June 29, 2004, EPA adopted a rule establishing a comprehensive national program to reduce emissions from nonroad diesel engines (69 FR 38958). The rule phased in requirements for reducing the s ulfur content of diesel used in nonroad diesel engines. The reduction in fuel
sulfur content prevent s damage to the more advanced emission control systems needed to meet the engine standards; it will also reduce fine particulate emissions from diesel engi nes. In 2007, fuel sulfur levels were
limited to 500 ppm for nonroad applications other than ocean

- going marine vessels. In 2010, fuel sulfur levels were reduced to the same sulfur concentration as in highway fuel, 15 ppm; this requirement began applying in 2012 to locomotive and marine diesel fuel. EPA adopted technical amendments to the program in rules published in the Federal Register on November 22, 2005 (70 FR 70498)

, and May 1, 2006 (71 FR 25706). On April 30, 2010 (75 FR 22896), EPA adopted chan ges to the nonroad diesel fuel program to allow for the production and sale of diesel fuel with up to 1

, 000 ppm sulfur for use in Category 3 marine vessels. This requirement does not impact the York Area because the
York Area does not have emissions from commercial marine vessels.

4. Stationary Area Sources

Consumer Products. This regulation applies statewide to any person who sells, supplies, offers for sale, or manufactures certain consum er products on or after January 1, 2005, for use in the Commonwe alth. The program is contained in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 130, Subchapter B. It was submitted to the EPA as a SIP revision on March 26, 2003

, and approved
on December 8, 2004 (69 FR 70895). Amendments to the Consumer
Products regulations were adopted on Oct ober 11, 2008, submitted to the
EPA as a SIP revision on March 11, 2009

, and approved on October 18, 2010 (75 F 63717).

Adhesives, Sealants, Primers and Solvents. The EQB adopted a regulation in 2010 to control VOC emissions from adhesives, sealants,

pr imers and solvents. This regulation was published in the Pennsylvania
Bulletin on December 25, 2010 (40 Pa. B. 7340) and approved by EPA as a SIP revision on September 26, 2012 (77 FR 59090).- 33

-

I V

. M AINTENANCE P LAN

The Maintenance Plan for the York Area is being submitted to EPA for approval as a SIP revision concurrently with this R equest for R edesignation. The Maintenance Plan shows
that the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS wil l be maintained for at least 10 years after redesignation. Eight years following redesignatio n, the Commonwealth will submit a revised plan that

e nsures attainment through 2035.

T he Maintenance Plan shows that emission levels of PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X and VOC over the 10 years following redesignation will remain below the emissions level in 2007, while allowing for growth in population and vehicle miles traveled. The small projected
increase in NH 3 emissions does not present a concern for maintaining the NAAQS
because the NH 3 emissions overall are small compared with the SO 2 , NO X and VOC emissions, whic h are all projected to decline. The following state and federal programs will ensure the continuing decline of SO 2 , NO X , direct PM 2.5 , and VOC emissions:

 CAIR ;

 Emission limits for large industrial boilers;

 State regulation of cement kilns, large statio nary internal combustion engines, and
smaller sources of NO X ;

 State regulations incorporating by reference the federal Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) regulations;

 State requirements for Best Available Technology ( BAT ) ;

 State regulation of the sulfur content of fuel oil;

 State regulation of VOC emissions from adhesives, sealants, primers and solvents;

 The Pennsylvania and federal new motor vehicle emission control programs for

p assenger and light

- duty trucks;

 The Pennsylvania and fede ral heavy

- duty di esel emission control programs;

 Federal fuel programs for highway vehicles an d nonroad mobile equipment; and

 Federal regulation of off

- road diesel and gasoline

- powered vehicles and equipment.

Emission reductions from Pennsylvania ’ s Dies el

- Powered Motor Vehicle Idling Act

, Act 124 of 2008 (Idling Act) were not included in the 2017 and 2025 emission inventories, and, thus, were not relied upon for the demonstration of maintenance. The Idling Act was approved by EPA as a SIP revision on Au gust 1, 2011 (76 FR 45705).- 34

-

Similarly, NO X and VOC emission reductions from Pennsylvania ’ s Outdoor Wood

- Fired Boilers regulation were not included in the 2017 and 2025 emission inventories, and, were not relied upon for the demonstration of maintenance. The Outdoor Wood

- Fired Boiler regulation was published in the Pennsylvania Bull etin on October 2, 2010 (40 Pa. B. 5571) and approved by EPA as a SIP revision on September 20, 2011 (76 FR 58114). However, emission reductions from these measures may nonethel ess assist the York Area in maintaining air quality.

DEP has provided in the Maintenance Plan assurances that it will continue to operate the ambient air quality monitoring network in order to track maintenance of the standard and
to evaluate emissions in ventories periodically compared to the projections provided in the plan. DEP has also provided in the Maintenance Plan a list of contingency measures that it would consider to correct any violation of the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS that might occur af ter redesignat ion of the area.- 35

- ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AEO Annual Energy Outlook AQS EPA ’ s Air Quality System AQTAC DEP ’ s Air Quality Technical Advisory Committee

BACT Best Available Control Technology

BAT Best Available Technology

CAA Clean Air Act

CAIR Clean Air Interstate Rule

CA LEV California Low Emission Vehicle (program)

CAMx Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extension

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CMV Commercial Marine Vessel

DEP Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

DOT U.S. Department of Transportation

EGU Electric Generating Unit

EIA Energy Information Administration

EIS Emission Inventory System

EPA The U nited S tates Environmental Protection Agency EQB Environmental Quality Board

ERC Emission Reduction Credit

FAA Federal Aviation Admin istration

FIP Federal Implementation Plan

FMVCP Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program

FR Federal Register

FRM Federal Reference Method

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GHCN Global Historical Climatology Network

HAP Hazardous Air Pollutant

I/M Inspection and Main tenance
IRRC Independent Regulatory Review Commission

LDGV Light Duty Gasoline V ehicles

LDGT Light Duty Gasoline T rucks

LRP Long Range Plan

MACT Maximum Achievable Control Technology

MARAMA Mid

- Atlantic Regional Air Management Association
MM5 Mesoscale Mod el

MOVES Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator

MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization

MY Model Year NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standard

NAICS North American Industry Classification System

NEI National Emissions Inventory

NH 3 Ammonia

NLEV National Low Em ission Vehicle (program)

NMIM National Mobile Inventory Model- 36

-

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

NONROAD Nonroad Model

NO X Oxides of Nitrogen

NSR New Source Review

OTC Ozone Transport Commission

OTR Ozone Transport Region

OWB Outdoor Wood

- fired Boiler

PennDOT Pennsylvania Department of Transportation

PM Particulate Matter

PM 2.5 Particulate Matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter or Fine P articulates

PM 10 Particulate Matter less than 10 microns in diameter

ppm parts per million

PSD Preven tion of Significant Deterioration

RWC Residential Wood Combustion

SCC Source Classification Code

SIP State Implementation Plan

SO 2 Sulfur Dioxide

TAF Terminal Area Forecast

TCM Transportation Control Measures

TIP Transportation Improvement Program

TSD Technical Support Document μg/m 3 M icrogram per cubic meter

μm Micrometer

VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled

VOC Volatile Organic Compound

ZEV Zero Emissions Vehicle

### Comment and Response Document
York Nonattainment Area
1997 Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan

On January 25, 2014 , the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (“DEP”) requested written comments and provided notice of the opportunity for a public hearing on the proposed Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for the 1997 Fine Particula te Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards in the York Nonattainment Area. A public hearing w as scheduled for February 26, 2014 on the proposed redesignation request and plan revision, but the hearing was cancelled since no person requested a hearing. The comment period closed on February 28 , 2014

.

One commentator provided comments on the proposed SIP revision

.

Diana Esher, Director
Air Protection Division
U.S. Environmen tal Protection Agency
1650 Arch Street Philadelphia, PA 19103

- 2029

COMMENTS AND RESPONSES

1. Comment: The discussion, in both the Redesignation Requests and the Maintenance Plans, of the permanent and enforceable reductions of direct PM2.5 and precursor emissions from the
2005 baseline to the 2007 attainment year include details related to the sulfur dioxide (S02)
controls installed on the Brunner Island power plant in 2009. These controls, while contributing

to reductions for continued attainme nt in these areas, did not contribute to the improvement in air quality that led to attainment between 2005 and 2007. It is recommended that this discussion be removed from the pertinent sections and added to the discussion of measures that assure current attainment and/or maintenance of the standard. In its place, please provide details or a list of the permanent and enforceable reductions that led to attainment in 2007.

Response: DEP appreciates the comment. DEP originally included the discussion of controls installed on the Brunner Island power plant in 2009 in the section indicating measures contributing to attainment of the PM2.5 standard between 2005 and 2007 , in order to emphasize
the downward trend of emissions

. To address the com mentator’s concern , however, DEP
removed the discussion from that section . DEP retained the discussion in the portion of the

M aintenance P lan discussing measures that ensure maintenance of the NAAQS

. The

R edesignation R equest already contains a descripti on of the permanent and enforceable
reductions that led to attainment of the standard in 2007.

2 . Comment: Redesignation Request Section III.C.1

- It is recommended that the subsection entitled "Stationary Source Permitting Programs," with the exception of the paragraph related to federal standards for hazardous air pollutants, be moved to a separate section, s ince these are not- 2

-

specific permanent and enforceable control measures (the Title V pe r mitting program in particular does not create new requirements).

Response: DEP appreciates the comment . Because a strong permitting program, particularly
standards fo r Best Available Technology, underlies the basis for continued decreases in
emissions of PM2.5 and its precursors from stationary sources, DEP has retained t he description of Pennsylvania’s stationary source permitting programs . DEP moved the description of the permitting program s to a background section to address the commentator’s concerns.cm!Ji\:]CNI.'J8lHH OF PEN"4SYt_V,I-'>,t\fJP STD-52-1 REV. 12-88

TQ: (1:-lAM!;; AND ADDRESS OF )'IEWSF'AI'>im} ! FEPERAL t.D-. NO./SOC, pEe, NO,

: 23-1394402**"1-0VV"t'+~OO't** I V!U f

FROM: (NM<1C: ANO.AODRS:SS bi'"AGENCYJ 'AGENCYIELI:PHONENO, 787-9495 Harrisburg Patriot News Co.
Attn: Pina

- Legal Ads Alex Haas
PA DEP/BAQ**!__~--** •• " ••

- -----·. ---

2020 Technology Parkway-Suite**M~eloanicsbur~** PA 17050 300

HEREWITH IS ENCL..OSEO COI'>Y FOR PUBUCA"t10N OF" ADVERTISEMEI-It FOR PROPOSALS 'f'D 400 Market Street Harrisburg, PA 1710.5



### D EMPI.,.OY 

### 0 PURCHASE; 

### D
CONtl'fAC.T 

# I TYPE OF AD 

### D
SELL 

### 0
CLASSIFIED I;d LEGAL NOTICE**~USI,.ISH** ADVERTISEMENT (NO.**O~TIMES)** DATE 

# I

ORDER NO, Jan.l5, 2014

OATES OF INSERTION On or before January 24, 2014

You, as vendor, are authorized to publish this advertisement in your newspaper, subject to the terms of this order, as follows: Advertisement to be published in regular advertising columns, no position specified; caption of two lines and signature
to be in capita'ls and subject matter and tit[e of officer.to be sei: solid in type regu,arly usOO by_v.our newsP-aP-er for RUbric**(~gql)** notice advertising; charge to be made at the rate charged to and paid by commercial advertisers for matter similarly set and occupying similar space; advertisement to be run in the editions specified above. Vendor agrees that, in the performance of any q:mtract awarded to it hereunder, said vendor will not discriminate against any employs or other persons on account of race, color, se)(, religious creed; ancestry, age or national origin and that the Commonwealth, upon t'eceipt of satisfactory evidence of such discrimination, shall have the righttocanoel said contract. Return this copy at once jfyou will not accept this advertisement under the terms set forth.

Pmof of advertishl!l**i~** tlia foo·m of" tearslieet**mOJJs~ ~e**  ii1lcln.ooled oU'I Parts**~,** 2 & 3. Rsto.nm**origir>~l** ancl two**copi~s** (si!IJr>sd**~11** the editor or**p~.nff:llishar)** to**A!Jet~cy lis~ed**  lilbo:we.**!'art~** mMst be notari2ed. l'srt 4 is yo:mrs.

. Commonwealth to be billed only for actual number of printed lines published.



### ---

ACCOUNT FUND 

### """ APP YE:AI'l. LOG ORG COST FUNCTION 

## ""' AMOUNT

COD!:: it:::"""hlf'Ji 70.;1. 

### fl1Xl3**~00** 

# no '\ 

### I**>~oc** 

### oc?lD 

### ·-;;;;:r; "J::i: 

## :;.77 190711 .t:1d 

### • -z.. (j.**:5~"** 

# no I


# . UNVOICE (To be comoletedby publisher):

;.!.··- 

# :

..**~** 

# ..**:~::t:~:j~~:** 

# :· ": ·:1.'."• l

.. -

..

......**~~i:;** DATE OF INSERTlON ACTUAL NO. OF PRINTE;D 1-!NE:E COST PER LINE TOTALAMOUI'lT l:'.

'

_ .. ··./ ; 

## '

.. ·'h**~~-i(** 

# : ("/ 1st Ad

. '. /

2nd Ad 

### ''

. ,( 

# l .·/ / 

# /i ••-'c

. ..

3rdAd I ;, 

# f 

# 'i (

'/

·.·. '

GRAND TOTAl.'+ '' ' ''



### '

PASTE TEARSHEET HERE

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania County of

_____________ _ Before me, the subscriber, a Notary Public in and for said County, personally came
who being duly sworn, doth depose and say that he is***~----.,.·-----------------------** the · a general newspaper published at that the advertisement, of which tearsheet is attached·hereto, was published in the regular advertising columns of said newspaper, in the editions of said newspaper, in all respects as ordered and invoiced above; and that the Commonwealth is not charged therefor at a rate higher than is charged any ordinary commercial advertiser for a similar amount of matter occupying similar space and set in a similar manner, in said newspaper.

*This affidavit must be made by the Own-er, Pubrisher, or the designated agent of the owner or publisher. .. ,_ .. ,,,,The Patriot-News Co.

2020 Technology Pkwy
Suite 300 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050

Inquiries- 717-255-8213 

# [be patriot-News

Now you know

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

RACHEL CARSON STATE OFFICE BUILDING

400 MARKET STREET

HARRISBURG PA 17105



# STATEMENT

AD ORDER# DATE EDITION ADDTL INFO.

233427 DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL 0002283502 01/23/14 REGULAR

233427 DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL 0002288502 01/23/14 REGULAR Department of
Environmental Protectiorr



### JAN 2 9 2014

Air Resource Management

Division

ALL CHARGES ARE NET

TYPE OF CHARGE AMOUNT

BOLD TEXT CHARGE $4.00

BASIC AD CHARGE $464.07

AFFIDAVIT CHARGE $5.00

TOTAL: $473.07

This is not an invoice. Please do not remit payment from this Statement.

An invoice will be generated at the end of the month. --Thank you.

NOTE: This Statement replaces the Order Confirmation which we previously sent with Proofs of PublicationThe Patriot-News Co.

2020 Technology Pkwy

Suite 300 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050

Inquiries- 717-255-8213 

# [be patriot

.. Ncws

Now you know

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

RACHEL CARSON STATE OFFICE BUILDING

400 MARKE'T STREET

PA 17105

THE PATRIOT NEWS

THE SUNDAY PATRIOT NEWS



### Proof of Publication

Under Act No. 587, Approved May 16, 1929 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, County of Dauphin} ss

ing duly sworn according to law, deposes and says:

'\ccountant of The Patriot News Co., a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the 'ania, with its principal office and place of business at 2020 Technology Pkwy, Suite 300, in the 1nty of Cumberland, State of Pennsylvania, owner and publisher of The Patriot-News and The Sunday
f general circulation, printed and published at 1900 Patriot Drive, in the City, County and State
Jews and The Sunday Patriot-News were established March 4th, 1854, and September 18th, 1949,**~en** continuously published ever since;
ice or publication which is securely attached hereto is exactly as printed and published in their regular unity Weekly editions which appeared on the date(s) indicated below. That neither she nor said
' subject matter of said printed notice or advertising, and that all of the allegations of this statement as der of publication are true; and
nal knowledge of the facts aforesaid and is duly authorized and empowered to verify this statement on**~o.** aforesaid by virtue and pursuant to a resolution unanimously passed and adopted severally by the
lirectors of the said Company and subsequently duly recorded in the office for the Recording of Deeds tuphin in Miscellaneous Book "M", Volume 14, Page 317.

ran on the dates shown below: January 23, 2014

ary, 2014 AD.The Patriot-News Co.

2020 Technology Pkwy

Suite 300 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050

Inquiries- 717-255-8213 

# [bt 

# patriot-News

Now you know

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

RACHEL CARSON STATE OFFICE BUILDING

400 MARKET STREET

HARRISBURG PA 17105

THE PATRIOT NEWS

THE SUNDAY PATRIOT NEWS



### Proof of Publication

Under Act No. 587, Approved May 16, 1929
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, County of Dauphin} ss

Marianne Miller, being duly sworn according to law, deposes and says:

That she is a Staff Accountant of The Patriot News Co., a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, with its principal office and place of business at 2020 Technology Pkwy, Suite 300, in the Township of Hampden, County of Cumberland, State of Pennsylvania, owner and publisher of The Patriot-News and The Sunday
Patriot-News newspapers of general circulation, printed and published at 1900 Patriot Drive, in the City, County and State aforesaid; that The Patriot-News and The Sunday Patriot-News were established March 4th, 1854, and September 18th, 1949, respectively, and all have been continuously published ever since;
That the printed notice or publication which is securely attached hereto is exactly as printed and published in their regular daily and/or Sunday/ Community Weekly editions which appeared on the date(s) indicated below. That neither she nor said Company is interested in the subject matter of said printed notice or advertising, and that all of the allegations of this statement as
to the time, place and character of publication are true; and
That she has personal knowledge of the facts aforesaid and is duly authorized and empowered to verify this statement on behalf of The Patriot-News Co. aforesaid by virtue and pursuant to a resolution unanimously passed and adopted severally by the
stockholders and board of directors of the said Company and subsequently duly recorded in the office for the Recording of Deeds
in and for said County of Dauphin in Miscellaneous Book "M", Volume 14, Page 317.

ran on the dates shown below: January 23, 2014

and**sub~cribed be~ll**  23 day of Janrry, 2014 A.D.

tary PublicCOMf:iiONWE.<\LTH OF**,cENNSYL\r~l\1~;\** STD-52"1 REV. -12-33 4,']00445684 10/07

! !

York Daily Record

1891 toucks Road

PO Box W-401 York, PA 17404 : 91-020905 Alex Haas PA DEP/BAQ

400 Market Street Harrisburg, PA 17105

You, as vendor, are authorized to publish this advertisement in your newspaper, subject to the terms of this order, as follows: Advertisement to be published in regular advertising co!umnsr no position specified; caption of two lines and signature

to be in capitals and subject matter and title me officer. to be**set_S~olid** in type reguftarly used by: v..our newsRaQ:er for (.?ublic (!§gal}
notice advertising: charge to be made at the rate charged to. and paid by commercial**advertis~rs** for matter simflarly set and occupying similar space; advertisement to be nm in the editions specified above. Vendor .agrees that, in the performance of any
contract awarded to it hereunder, said vendor will not discrimina'i:e against any emplo)le or other persons on accoun·i: of race, color,

sex, religious creed, ancestry, age or national origin and that the Commonwealth, upon receipt of satisfactory evidence of such discrimination, shal! havetherigh1l:tocanoe! said contract. Return this copy at once if you will not accept this advertisement uncfertheterms

set forth.**!Flmo~oifadlverUsing ~nthefoq-m** **!Cl~"ij=a'teatrsfraeetmlllls'i** lbe indi!.Jldsd on pgrts**~,** 2 & 3.**~etllllm origill!lSJ~**  S'J:ndtwo copies**~si.gnedl** by th" edito' or P"blishar) to**Ago~cylisted** "lbove. !'aO"I 1 .Ni1us1ll:;e**~ota,ized.** l'art 4 is yo1ns.

Commonwealth to be billed only for actual number of printed lines published.

ACCOUNT

CODE

2nd Ad

3rdAd FUND**D~**

Commonwealth cf Pennsylvania YEAR

Countyof

__**_e~~--------------------** COG ORG COST FUNCTION AMOUNT

TOTAL AMOL;NT

TOTAl_..

Before me, the subscriber, a Notary Public in and for said County, personally came

_ whobe.ing duly sv:'ofn, dotp depos

.. e

... a. nd

... say that he is'**~·** __**l"-'"'""f¥'"""'-''""--~)'"--'.'i'l>'f'-."'""n.-·,'-;'-'-"'c'c.--:** . .....,-. --------------------------- the**'1.::::.::~-,** ..;,:.z.:-?vii)2J,l::t-H'if4c\

_ . _ _ __ a general newSpaper published at f,-<V**·------~------------·--·----.** _. that the**adver~serrient** of which tearsheet is attached· hereto, was published in the regular advertising columns of said newspaper, in the editions of said newspaper, in all respects. as ordered and invoiced above; and that the Commonweafth is not charged
therefor at a rate higher than is char'ged any ordinary commercial advertiser for a similar amount of matter occupying similar space and set in a similar manner, in Said newspaper.

My commission expires

. .tl.»_r..c·..:.I

__ ..Jic_,_=J-"o'-''-"'=--

*This affidavit must be made by the Owner, Pllb!isher, or the dealgmted -agent of the owner or publisher.

TREASUfW SlGNATURE: OF' Af-'F!ANT

·-

Notary Public
WEST MANCHESTER TWP. YORK COUNTY My Commission Expires r\p- 1, 2016**-~---___;,_:..;;,;_;__...J**PROPOSED STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVISIONS

Redesignation Requests and Maintenance Plans for the Cumberland, Dauphin, Leba·

non and York Counties Attaining the 1997 Annual and 24-hour 2006 Fine Particulate Matter Standards: Public Hearing

· Particulate matter (PM) includes both solid and llquid particles suspended in the air. Fine particle pollution describes particulate matter that Is less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers in 'diameter {PM2.5). PM2.5 concentrations above the federal health-based standard pose

a serious human health threat. With significant improvements in air quality in Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon and York counties, these nonattainment areas now meet the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Therefore, the Department o1 Environmental Protection (OEP) intends to submit requests to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency {EPA) to redesignate these areas to attainment.

The DEP Is seeking public comment on the three redesignation requests and proposed revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) containing the 2007 comprehensive inventory :

as required under Section 172(c)(3) of the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) and maintenance plans demonstrating that the areas can maintain the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 health-based NAAQS for the next 10 years as required under section 175A(a) of the CAA (42 U.S.C.A. § 7505a}. Upon EPA a.ppmval, the maintenance plans will also establish new motor vehicle ' emission budgets for transportation conformity

purposes.

The requests to redesignate the**are~s** to attainment and the proposed SIP revisions are available on the Department's website at 'www.dep.state.pa.us (choose "Air," choose

1 "Bureau oi Air Quality," choose "Regs/Plans," choose "Clean Air Plans") or through the contact persons fisted below.

The Department will hold a public hearing to receive comments on the proposal on Wednesday, February 26, 2014, at 10:00 a.m., at the Rachel Carson State Office Building, 400 Market Street, Room 105, Harrisburg, PA. Persons wishing to present testimony at the hearing should contact Alex Haas, P.O. Box 846B, Harrisburg, PA 17105, (717) 787-9495

or alehaas@pa.gov to reserve a time: Wit-:

nesses should keep testimony to ten mmutes and should provide two written copies of their
statement at the hearing.

If by Monday, February 24, 2015, no person has expressed an interest in testifying at the hearing, the hearing wlll be cancelled. The ' Department will provide public not\ce on the Bureau of Air Quality webpage at the following link if the hearing is cancelled:

1 http://www.dep.state.pa,us/depldeputate/ai

1 rwastelaq/default.htm. Persons may also con1act the Department to find out if the hearing is cancelled by contacting Alex Haas at (717} 787-9495 or alehaas@pa.gov.

Persons wlth a disability who wish to attend the hearing and requlre an auxiliary aid, service or other accommodation to participate in the proceeding should contact Alex Haas at (717) 787-9495 or alehaas@pa.gov. TDD

users may contact the AT&T Relay Service at (BOO) 654-5984 to discuss how the Department can best accommodate their needs. The Department must receive comments no later than February 28, 2014. Written comments should be sent to the attention of Nancy Herb, Bureau of Air Ollality, P.O. Box 8468, Harrisburg, PA 17105-8468, or nherb@pa.gov. Use "Harrisburg/York PM2.5 Redesignatlon" as the subject line in written communication and specify whtch document you are commenting

on.

E. CHRISTOPHER ABRUZZO, Secretary 

## Proof of Publication

State ofPennsylvania Ad# 0001421985-01

The York Dispatch/York Sunday News and York Daily Record is

the name of the daily newspaper(s) of general circulation published continuously
for more than six months at its principal place of business, 1891 Loucks Road, York, PA 17408.

The printed copy of the advertisement hereto attached is a true copy, exactly as printed and published, of an advertisement printed in the regular issues of the said

The York Dispatch/York Sunday News and York Daily Record published on the

01/23/2014

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
COUNTY OF YORK

Before me, a Notary Public, personally came Linda Smith who being duly sworn deposes and says that she is the Layout Supervisor of The York Dispatch'York Sunday News and York Daily Record and her personal knowledge of the publication
of the advertisement mentioned in the foregoing statement as to the time, place
and character of publications are true, and that the affiant is not interested in the subject matter of the above mentioned advertisement.

Sworn and subscribed to before me, on
this 23 day of January 2014 

# }

Notary Public

The charge for the following publication of above mentioned advertisement and the

expense of the affidavit.

Advertisement Cost $566.20

Affidavit Fee $5.00

Total Cost $571.20Ad OrdQ.r Number

0001421985**Sales~...:.** dswords

Order Taker

dswords**T~HH** Sheets

0

lnvolce Text

Gross Amount
$571.20

Ad Number

0001421 tl85-01

Product Information

YNC Dairy Record::

YNC Online::

WYSIWYG Contgnt

2/14/2014 2:04:46PM 

# MEDI RECEIVED

MARKETPLACE**201~** 

## FEB 14 PH 

## 2= 06

Order Confirmation IIEI'"BI1REAU £1F A-IR OU/\f.IJ'(

Customer

PA DEPT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PR

Customer Account

108739

Customer Address

RACHEL CARSON STATE OFFICE

HARRISBURG PA 17105-8468

USA Customer Phone

717-787-9495 Payor Customer

PA DEPT OF ENVIRONMENTAL

Payor Account

108739

.E§Y.or Address

RACHEL CARSON STATE OFFICE BU

HARRISBURG PA 17105-8468 USA

Payor Phone

717-787-9495 PO Number

152078

Ordered By

Customer Fax

Customer EMail

Affidavits

1 !=Jiind Box

Ad Type
Legal Liner Ad Order Notgs

Payment Method

Ad Size

:2.0X103Li

PlacementJCiassification

Public Notices

Public Notices Production Method

Ad Booker Payment Amount
$0.00

Production Notes

Run Dates

112312014

1/2312014 ----------COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
STD-521 REV. 06-2010 PUBLICATIONS AUTHORIZATION AND INVOICE

PUBLICATIONS AUTHORIZATION (To be completed by agency): INVOICE NO.

TELEPHONE NO. 717-787-9495 TO: (NAME AND ADDRESS oF NEWSPAPER) !FEDERAL I. D. NO./SOC. SEC. NO. FROM: (NAME AND ADDRESS OF AGENCY) AGENCY i
Harrisburg Patriot News Co. 23-1394402 Alex Haas i

'·············································································· 2020 Technology Parkway PA DEP: Bureau of Air Quality

Suite 300 400 Market Street

Mechanicsbura. PA 17050**~::uri<::hnrn** PA 171(11

HEREWITH IS ENCLOSED COPY FOR PUBLICATION OF ADVERTISEMENT FOR PROPOSALS TO TTYPE OF AD. 

### D EMPLOY 

### D PURCHASE 

### D CONTRACT 

### D SELL 

## c CLASSIFIED**~** LEGAL NOTICE

PUBLISH ADVERTISEMENT {NO. OF TIMES) 

# 1

MAXIMUM NO. OF LINES DATE 

# I

ORDER NO. 1x Only January 29,2014

DATES OF INSERTION**SIGNA~; FORAGE~.**  ) j /J7l /7
On or Before February 1, 2014**J·j~** 

### C:.

. /A / YJ./ kh. )

You, as vendor, are authorized to publish this advertisement in your newspaper, subJect to the terms of th1s order, as follows:
Advertisement to be published in regular advertising columns, no position specified; caption of two lines and signature to be in capitals and subject matter and title of officer to be set solid in type regularly used by your newspaper for public (legal) notice advertising; charge to be made at the rate charged to and paid by commercial advertisers for matter similarly set and occupying

similar space; advertisement to be run in the editions specified above. Vendor agrees that, in the performance of any contract
awarded to it hereunder, said vendor will not discriminate against any employee or other persons on account of race, color, sex, religious creed, ancestry, age or national origin and that the Commonwealth, upon receipt of satisfactory evidence of such discrimination, shall have the right to cancel said contract Return this copy at once if you will not accept this advertisement under
the terms set forth.

Return original and two copies (signed by the editor or publisher) to the agency listed above. Proof of advertising

in the form of a tear sheet must be stapled to original and copies. Original must be notarized.

Commonwealth to be billed only for actual number of printed lines published.

SAP FUND COST CENTER GENERAL LEDGER ACCOUNT CODE %

7027313000 3522710000 6343200

1/0 V16414000000

INVOICE (To be completed by publisher)·

. DATE OF INSERTION ACTUAL NO. OF PRINTED LINES COST PER LINE TOTAL AMOUNT

1st Ad 

# 7 

# 7

'

. 'c.. 

### /j

· .• 

## ·· ('(' -')

.... 

### /:;'**~~** 

## :f/<, 

# 7t/

'
2nd Ad ---::'

.

### :(~~ 

# l":**\~** 3rd Ad 

### /)/ L;. {. /



### ·-

GRAND TOTAL-+ 1 

# 1-:J I 

# h:J (

'

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

County of

-------------- Before me, the subscriber, a Notary Public in and for said County, personally came

_______________ _ who being duly sworn, doth depose and say that he is*

-------------------------- the a general newspaper published at
that the advertisement, of which tearsheet is attached hereto, was published in the regular advertising columns of said newspap• in the editions of said newspaper, in all respects as ordered and invoiced above; and that the Commonwealth is not charg
therefor at a rate higher than is charged any ordinary advertiser for a similar amount of matter occupying similar space and set ir
similar matter, in said newspaper.

COMMONWJ:ALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA SWOJJl-<lnd subscribed before me this 

## I 

## at.\t



# ,., ,, m**~~** 

# 'i! (\**DeW.'~** OJ

N R PUBLIC**~~** My commission expires 

### V@

## lt~ 

# /1 U Notarial Sf::DI frlogy Lynn Warfe!, N;A0r')" Fut:!ic 

# J

\hi.:s!<i;·;;)-.Jn 1\r>,'p,, C:;;uphin Cctmty

;1 • •·";**-~··<t'** •r-" r.**"'":v,·;<~p-** {"**"">0~** Ly**~-~AI.u!S5JO,** !:".;

.....**;.'"~::>** ,Jec 1'2:, £,·)

... 6 *This affidavit must be made by the Owner, Publisher, or the designated agent of the owner or publisher.

MEMGER ?ENN5VtV11Jil1A P.SSOG4TI0N OF NOTfl.R.lESThe Patriot-News Co.

2020 Technology Pkwy
Suite 300 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050

Inquiries- 717-255-8213 

# '<ibt 

# patriot-News

Now you know

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

RACHEL CARSON STATE OFFICE BUILDING

400 MARKET STREET

HARRISBURG PA 17105

THE PATRIOT NEWS

THE SUNDAY PATRIOT NEWS



### Proof of Publication

Under Act No. 587, Approved May 16, 1929 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, County of Dauphin} ss

Marianne Miller, being duly sworn according to law, deposes and says:

That she is a Staff Accountant of The Patriot News Co., a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the
Commonwealth ;(If Pennsylvania, with its principal office and place of business at 2020 Technology Pkwy, Suite 300, in the Township of Hai'Tlpden, County of Cumberland, State of Pennsylvania, owner and publisher of The Patriot-News and The Sunday
Patriot-News newspapers of general circulation, printed and published at 1900 Patriot Drive, in the City, County and State aforesaid; that The Patriot-News and The Sunday Patriot-News were established March 4th, 1854, and September 18th, 1949, respectively, and all have been continuously published ever since;
That the printed notice or publication which is securely attached hereto is exactly as printed and published in their regular daily and/or Sunday/ Community Weekly editions which appeared on the date(s) indicated below. That neither she nor said Company is interested in the subject rnatter of said printed notice or advertising, and that all of the allegations of this statement as
to the time, place and character of publication are true; and

That she has personal knowledge of the facts aforesaid and is duly authorized and empowered to verify this statement on behalf of The Patriot-News Co. aforesaid by virtue and pursuant to a resolution unanimously passed and adopted severally by the
stockholders and board of directors of the said Company and subsequently duly recorded in the office for the Recording of Deeds
in and for said County of Dauphin in Miscellaneous Book "M", Volume 14, Page 317.

373 ran on the dates shown below: February 02, 2014The Patriot-News Co.

2020 Technology Pkwy
Suite 300 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050

Inquiries- 717-255-8213 

# [be**patriot~Ncws** Now you know

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

RACHEL CARSON STATE OFFICE BUILDING

400 MARKET STREET

HARRISBURG

CORRECTlON Proposed state ffnPiemeniQfion Plan Revisions Public Heqring for Rede:si9'nafion Requests a:nd Mo:intenance Pkms. for Cumberlandr Dauphin, Lebanon and York Counties Attaining the 1997 Annual and 24-hour 2006 Fine Particulate Matte!" Stanltfards; Public**He<~rfng** The Department of Environmental Protection (Oeparfmenf} intends to submit requests to the U.S. Environmental Protecf(on Agency (EPA) toredeshmateCumbertand, Dauphin. Lebanon and York c:ounttes to attainment for the 1997 and 201M PM2.5 National Ambient Atr Quol{ty Standards CNAAQSL

The Department**rece~y** published a notice of a Pub fie heorlrt ' o receive co.mments-Dn the three r designonon requests and proposed revisions to the State ltnPiemerttaffon Pran (SIP) containing the 2007 comprehensive tnvli!ntorv as required under Section tn(c)(3} of the federal Clean Air Act CCAA} anct maintenance ptans d:emcmstratfng tttat the areas can maintain the 1997 and 20:()"6 PM2.S health-**base~** NAAQS ftw the rnaxt 10 years as re:qUtred under**~cffon** 175A(a1 of the CAA (42 U,S.CA 7SIJSa}.

. That notice contofnectatHirror, It mdlcated that If by Monday, February ?4, 2Ul5, no Person had exPressed an mterest in testifYing at the hearing, tha hearing woo!d be cancel ted, The cO;'rect Information is that ihe hearing wm be cance!lett if by Monday, February 24, · 21H4, no Person h<ts expressed an Interest In te.stifYfng at the hearing.

As indicafed in that notice-, the heetrlns Is scheduled for Wednesday, February 26,2014, at 10::0:0' a.m., of the Rachef Carson Stote OffiCe Ekr11dlm;, 400: Market Street, Room.l05$ Harr-Isburg, PA. Persons wlslltng tt;J present testimony at the hoorins shoUld confcrct Alex Haas P.O, Box 8468, Harrisburg, PA 171115 ' {7l7) 787-9495 or olehoas@pa,gov to '

reserve et time, W!fnesses sho:utd keep testimony to ten minutes and should provide two wrrtten copies: of their
statement at the hearing.

Persons witt} a dJsabllltv who wls:h to attend the hearfng and requrra an ouxitlary aid, service or other accommodotlon to participate in tt'ffi proceeding should contact Alex Haas at (717) 787·'?495 or alehoa:s@pQ,gov, roo**user~** may contoct fheAT&T Relay Servtce at (80tf) 654-5984 to discuss how fhe.Depa.rtment can best accommodate fhetr needs.

Afso, as indicated ·correctly In the previous nonce, the Department must**n~t;eive** comments no later than February 28, 21l14. Written .comments should be sent to the attention of Nanev HerD, Bureau at Atr Quantv, P-.o. sox 8468, Harrtsburs, PA,J7lOS-8468, or nherb@pa.gov. Use ''HarrlsburglYork**~M2,?** Redesronatlon'' os the subiect line

m wntten communication and specify which ®cument vou are commenting

on.

E. CHRfSTOPHER ABRUZZO, Secretary PA 17105

THE PATRIOT NEWS

THE SUNDAY PATRIOT NEWS



### Proof of Publication

Under Act No. 587, Approved May 16, 1929 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, County of Dauphin} ss

J duly sworn according to law, deposes and says:

:countant of The Patriot News Co., a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the 1ia, with its principal office and place of business at 2020 Technology Pkwy, Suite 300, in the ty of Cumberland, State of Pennsylvania, owner and publisher of The Patriot-News and The Sunday
Jenera I circulation, printed and published at 1900 Patriot Drive, in the City, County and State

ws and The Sunday Patriot-News were established March 4th, 1854, and September 18th, 1949,

·n continuously published ever since;

e or publication which is securely attached hereto is exactly as printed and published in their regular nity Weekly editions which appeared on the date(s) indicated below. That neither she nor said subject matter of said printed notice or advertising, and that all of the allegations of this statement as
ter of publication are true; and
31 knowledge of the facts aforesaid and is duly authorized and empowered to verify this statement on

o. aforesaid by virtue and pursuant to a resolution unanimously passed and adopted severally by the

ectors of the said Company and subsequently duly recorded in the office for the Recording of Deeds 1phin in Miscellaneous Book "M", Volume 14, Page 317.

ran on the dates shown below: February 02, 2014The Patriot-News Co.

2020 Technology Pkwy
Suite 300 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050

Inquiries- 717-255-8213

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

RACHEL CARSON STATE OFFICE BUILDING

400 MARKET STREET

HARRISBURG PA 17105



# STATEMENT 

# [be**patriot~Ncws** Now you know

ALL CHARGES ARE NET

AD ORDER# DATE EDITION ADDTL. INFO. TYPE OF CHARGE AMOUNT

233427 DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL 0002289373 02/02/14 REGULAR

233427**DE~ARTMENT** OF ENVIRONMENTAL 0002289373 01/31/14 REGULAR

233427 DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL 0002289373 02/02/14 REGULAR BOLD TEXT CHARGE

BASIC AD CHARGE

BASIC AD CHARGE $4.00

$2.50

$415.74

AFFIDAVIT CHARGE $5.00

TOTAL: $427.24

This is not an invoice. Please do not remit payment from this Statement.

An invoice will be generated at the end of the month. --Thank you.

NOTE: This Statement replaces the Order Confirmation which we previously sent with Proofs of Publication**~---------------------------------** -- ------------------------,

-------

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA lr-NOICE NO. STD-521 REV. 06-2010 PUBLICATIONS AUTHORIZATION AND INVOICE

PUBLICATIONS AUTHORIZATION (To be completed by agenc '):

TO; (NAME AND AotlltESS Of J'IEWSPN'EJV f FEDERAL to. NOJSOC, SEC. NO. FROM: (NAME AND ADDRESS OF AnENa'f) AGENCY 1 TELEPHONE NO. York Daily Record ! 91-020905 Alex Haas 717-787-9495

'·-'"""'"'"''"'''' 1891 Loucks Road**'"'""'"''""''"'"'"'"''~'""'"'"'""'''''''** __ ,. ____ PA DEP: Bureau of Air Quality York, PA 17408 400 Market Street D H;;rrio::hnrn PA 111m D

HEREWITH IS ENCLOSED COPY FOR PUBLICATION OF ADVERTISEMENT FOR PROPOSALS TO 

### I TYPE OFAD 

### D EMPLOY 

### D PURCHASE 

### D CONTRACT 

### D SELL 

### 0 CLASSIFIED 

### IR! LEGAL NOTICE

PUBLISH ADVERTISEMENT {NO. OF TIMES) 

### I MAXIMUM NO. OF LINES DATE 

### I ORDERNO.

### i"!.~jCl\~

1x Only January 29,2014

DATES OF INSERTION**SIG"J};;o~pCILfl)j** 

# P-A On or Before February 1, 2014 

### '

You, as vendor, are authonzed to publish th1s advertisement 1n your newspaper, subJect to the terms of th1s order, as follows:
Advertisement to be published in regular advertising columns, no posilion specified; caption of two lines and signature to be in capitals and subject matter and title of officer to be set solid in type regularly used by your newspaper for public (legal) notice advertising; charge to be made at the rate charged to and paid by commercial advertisers for matter similarly set and occupying

similar space; advertisemenl to be run in the editions specified above. Vendor agrees that, in the performance of any contract
awarded io ii hereunder, said vendor will not discriminate against any employee or other persons on account of race, color, sex, religious creed, ancestry, age or national origin and that the Commonwealth, upon receipt of satisfactory evidence of such discrimination, shall have the right to cancel said contract Return this copy at once if you will not accept this advertisement under
the terms set forth.

Return original and two copies (signed by the editor or publisher) to the agency listed above. Proof of advertising

in the form of a tear sheet must be stapled to original and copies. Original must be notarized.

Commonwealth to be billed only for actual number of printed lines published.

SAP**FU~D** COST CENTER GENERAL LEDGER ACCOUNT CODE

7027313000 3522710000 6343200

1/0 V16414000000

INVOICE (To be completed by publisher):

DATE OF INSERTION ACTUAl NO. OF PRINTED UNES COST PER LINE TOTAL AMOUNT

1st Ad

2nd Ad

3rdAd

:"""'-- GRAND TOTAL-+



## ----------------------

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

County of**-----"""''-"'~---------** Before me, the subscriber, a Notary Public in and for said County, personally came _.::Lc=' "'-'"'"""\ .U..--""'-"'l.W.-IJ------

who being duly sworn, doth depo. se and say thai he is***,...,\,~,&"'·** -'il-.**c,.'~·''-'-'-l--7'~\,_,v"tl-''-"'·'-'i--'V'-''-'-'-"''"-~'-----~--------** the 

### '·h<\ I),-**~** '"'\' I \\ 3 ,k B,<jj general newspaper published al .- · that the adverMement, of whlch tearsheet is attached herelo, was published in the regular advertising columns of said newspap• in the editions of said newspaper, in all respects as ordered and invoiced above; and that the Commonwealth is not charg•
lherefor at a rate higher than is charged any ordinary advertiser for a similar amount of matter occupying similar space and set ir
similar matter, in said newspaper.

Sworn and subscribed before me this ---:=---- daym

__________________________ 20

____ _

NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires

*This affidavit must be made by the Owner, Publisher, or the designated agent of the owner or publisher.CORRECTION



### I , Proposed**~tate** Implementation Plan Revisions

Publle Hearing for Redesignation Requests

and Maintenance Plans for Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon and Vork Counties Attaining the 1997 Annual and 24-hour 2006 Fine · Particulate Matter Standards; Public Hearing

The Department of Environmental Protection (Department} intends to submit requests to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
to redesignate Cumberland, Dauphin, Leba- ·

. non and York counties to attainment for the

1997 and 2006 PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards {NAAQS).

The Department recently published a notice of

a public hearing to receive comments on the

· three redesignation requests and proposed revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) containing the 2007 comprehensive inventory

as required under Section 172(c){3) of the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) and maintenance plans demonstrating that the areas can maintain the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 health-based NAAQS tor the next 10 years as required under Section 175A(a) of the CAA (42 U.S.C.A. § 7505a)

.

• That notice contained an error. It indicated ·that if by Monday, February 24, 2015, no per- '

, son had expressed an interest in testifying at

: the hearing, the hearing would be cance!fed. The correct Information is that the hearing will be cancelled if by Monday, February 24,2014,

no person has expressed an interest in testifying at the hearing.

As Indicated in that notice, the hearing is scheduled for Wednesday, February 26, 2014,
at 10:00 a.m

.. at the Rachel Carson State Office Building, 400 Market Street, Room 105, Harrisburg, PA. Persons wishing to present testimony at the hearing should contact Alex hlaas, P.O. Box 8468, Harrisburg, PA 17'105, (717) 787-9495 or alehaas@pa.gov to reserve

a time. Witnesses should keep testimony to ten minutes and should provide two written copies of their statement at the hearing.

Persons with a disabillty who wish to attend the hearing and require an auxiliary aid, serv- Ice or other accommodation to participate in the proceeding should contact Alex Haas al (717) 787-9495 or alehaas@pa.gov. TDD

users may contact the AT&T Relay Service at (800)**654~5984** to discuss how the Depart-
ment can best accommodate their needs.

Also, as. indicated correctly in the previous no- tice, the Department must receive comments

no later than February 28, 2014. Written com- ments should be sent to the ·attention of Nancy Herb, Bureau of Air Quality, P.O. Box 8468, Harrisburg, PA 17105-8468, or**nherb@pa.~ov.** Use "Harrisburg/York PM2.5**Redesignat1on~** as the subject line in written communication and specify which ·document
you are commenting on.

E. CHRISTOPHER ABRUZZO,

, Secretary 

## Proof of Publication

State of Pennsylvania Ad# 0001423929-01

The York DispatchNork Sunday News and York Daily Record is
the name of the daily newspaper(s) of general circulation published continuously
for more than six months at its principal place of business, 1891 Loucks Road, York, PA 17408.

The printed copy of the advertisement hereto attached is a true copy, exactly as printed and published, of an advertisement printed in the regular issues of the said
The York DispatchNork Sunday News and York Daily Record published on the

01/31/2014

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
COUNTY OF YORK

Before me, a Notary Public, personally came Linda Smith who being duly sworn deposes and says that she is the Layout Supervisor of The York Dispatctr'York Sunday News and York Daily Record and her personal knowledge of the publication
of the advertisement mentioned in the foregoing statement as to the time, place
and character of publications are true, and that the affiant is not interested in the subject matter of the above mentioned advertisement.

Sworn and subscribed to before rne, on
this 31 day of January 2014

Notary Public

The charge for the following publication of above mentioned advertisement and the

expense of the affidavit.

Advertisement Cost $444.40

Affidavit Fee $5.00

Total Cost $449.40Ad Order Number

0001423929

Sales Rep.
rgodfrey

Order Taker

rgodfrey

Tear Sheets

0

Invoke Text

Gross Amount $449.40

Ad Number

0001423029-01

Product Information

YNC Daily Record::

YNC Online::

WYSIWYG Content

2/"14120"1412:25:31 PM 

# MEDI

MARKETPLACE 

# RECEIVED**201~FEB14** 

## PH 

## f:fto

Order Confirmation 

### tJefi"BIIREAU OF AIR 

### 0UA£1f'l'

Customer

PA DEPT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PR

Customer Account

108739

Customer Address

RACHEL CARSON STATE OFFICE

HARRISBURG PA 17105-8468

USA Customer phgng

717-787-9495 Payor Customer

PA DEPT OF ENVIRONMENTAL

Payor Account

108739

Payor Address

RACHEL CARSON STATE OFFICE BU

HARRISBURG PA 17105-8468 USA

Payor Phone

717-.787-9495 PO Number

Ordered By

Customer Fax

Customer EMail

Affidavits Blind Box

Ad Type legal Liner Ad Order Notes

Payment Method

Ad Size

: 2_0 X 81 Li

Placement/Classification

Public Notices

Public Notices Production Method

AdBooker Payment Amount
$0_00

Production Notes

Run Dates

1/31/2014

"1/3112014PA Bulletin, Doc. No. 14-198 Page 1 of2



# NOTICES

Proposed State Implementation Plan Revisions; Redesignation Requests and
Maintenance Plans for Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon and York Counties Attaining the 1997 Annual and 24-Hour 2006 Fine Particulate Matter Standards; Public Hearing

[44 Pa.B. 541) [Saturday, January 25, 2014)

Particulate matter (PM) includes both solid and liquid particles suspended in the air. Fine particle pollution describes particulate matter that is less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers in

diameter (PM 2 . 5 ). PM 2 . 5 concentrations above the Federal health-based standard pose a

serious human health threat. With significant improvements in air quality in Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon and York Counties, these nonattainment areas now meet the 1997 and
2006 PM 25 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Therefore, the Department

of Environmental Protection (Department) intends to submit requests to the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to redesignate these areas to attainment.

The Department is seeking public comment on the three redesignation requests and proposed revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) containing the 2007 comprehensive inventory and maintenance plans demonstrating that the areas can maintain

the 1997 and 2006 PM 2 . 5 health-based NAAQS for the next 10 years as required under

section 175A(a) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.A. § 7505a(a)). Upon the EPA approval,

the maintenance plans will also establish new motor vehicle emission budgets for transportation conformity purposes.

The requests to redesignate the areas to attainment and the proposed SIP revisions are available on the Department's web site at www.dep.state.pa.us (choose "Air," choose
"Bureau of Air Quality," choose "Regs/Plan," choose "Clean Air Plans") or through the

contact persons listed as follows.

The Department will hold a public hearing to receive comments on the proposal on Wednesday, February 26,2014, at 10 a.m. at the Rachel Carson State Office Building, 400

Market Street, Room 105, Harrisburg, PA. Persons wishing to present testimony at the hearing should contact Alex Haas, P. 0. Box 8468, Harrisburg, PA 17105, (717) 787-9495

or alehaas@pa.gov to reserve a time. Witnesses should keep testimony to 10 minutes and

should provide two written copies of their statements at the hearing.

If by Monday, February 24, 2014, no person has expressed an interest in testifying at the hearing, the hearing will be cancelled. The Department will provide public notice if the hearing is cancelled on the Bureau of Air Quality web page at http ://www.dep .state. pa. us/ dep/ deputate/ airwaste/ aq/ default.htrn. Persons may also contact
the Department to find out if the hearing is cancelled by contacting Alex Haas at (717) 787-

http://www. pabulletin. corn/ secure/ datalvol44/44-4/198 .html 4/10/2014PA Bulletin, Doc. No. 14-198 Page 2 of2

9495 or alehaas@pa.gov.

Persons with a disability who wish to attend the hearing and require an auxiliary aid,
service or other accommodation to participate in the proceeding should contact Alex Haas

at the previously listed phone number and e-mail address. TDD users may contact the Pennsylvania AT&T Relay Service at (800) 654-5984 to discuss how the Department can best accommodate their needs.

The Department must receive comments no later than February 28,2014. Written

comments should be sent to the attention of Nancy Herb, Bureau of Air Quality, P. 

### 0. Box 8468, Harrisburg, PA 17105-8468 or nherb@pa.gov. Use "Harrisburg/York PM 2

_ 5 Redesignation" as the subject line in written communication and specifY which document
the comments are addressing.

E. CHRISTOPHER ABRUZZO, Secretary

[Pa.B. Doc. No. 14-198. Filed for public inspection January 24,2014, 9:00a.m.]

No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.

This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Bulletin full text
database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.

webmasteJ@.PaRulletiu.com

http://www. pabulletin.com/ secure/ data/vo 144/44-4/19 8 .html 4/10/2014