# pennsyLvania

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

SECRETARY

November 25, 2013

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 a request to redesignate the Reading N onattainment Area as attainment

for the 1997 annual fine particulate matter (PM2.s) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS), and a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) consisting of a Maintenance

Plan demonstrating that the area can maintain the NAAQS for 10 years after redesignation, and

the comprehensive emissions inventory required by Section 172( c )(3) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The maintenance plan was developed in accordance with Section 175A(b) of the CAA.

The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) opened a public comment period on September 21,2013, and scheduled a public hearing on October 30, 2013, to receive comment

on these documents but no persons expressed interest in presenting testimony or attending. Therefore, DEP cancelled the hearing. DEP received no written comments on the proposals.

The following documents are enclosed for your approval:

1. The Request for Redesignation to attainment for the 1997 PM 2 .5 NAAQS;

2. The Maintenance Plan revision, which includes the comprehensive emissions inventory and a Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget for the purposes of transportation conformity; and

3. Certification of public participation activities.

A paper copy and a disc containing a searchable PDF copy ofthe documents are enclosed. I certify that the electronic file is an exact duplicate of the hard copy.

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

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

Thank you in advance for the expeditious consideration of this SIP submittal. Should you have

any questions or need additional information, please contact Joyce E. Epps, Director, Bureau of

Air Quality, bye-mail atjeepps@pa.gov or by telephone at 717.787.9702.

Sincerely,

E. Christopher Abruzzo Acting Secretary

Enclosures

Rachel Carson State Office Building I P.O. Box 2063 I Harrisburg, PA 17105:2063·

717.787.2814**o~** Printed on Recycled Paper 

## \679 www.depweb.state.pa.U5

# Commonwealth of Pennsylvania



# R EQUEST FOR 

# R EDESIGNATION

AS 

# A TTAINMENT



# R EADING 

# N ONATTAINMENT 

# A REA



# 1997 F INE 

# P ARTICULATE 

# M ATTER



# N ATIONAL 

# A MBIENT 

# A IR 

# Q UALITY 

# S TANDARDS



# N OVEMBER 

# 2013

Bureau of Air Quality Pennsylvania 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.]Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1

I. DEMO NSTRATION OF ATTAINMENT AND AIR QUALITY TRENDS

ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................. 3

A. D esign Value Determination ................................................................................... 4

B . Air Quality Trends Analysis .................................................................................... 4

C. C limate Trends Analysis

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

1. Te mperature Trends ................................................................................................ 9

2. P recipitation Trends .............................................................................................. 10

D. A dditional Trends

................................ .................................................................. 11 1. Population Trends ................................................................................................. 11

2. Economic Trends .................................................................................................. 12

E. Modeling Analyses

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

II. SIP APPROVALS AND APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS .............................. 15

A. Sec tion 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. S ection 173 of the CAA ........................................................................................ 17

3. S ection 176 of the CAA ........................................................................................ 17

4. S ection 189(e) of the CAA ................................................................................... 18

C. C onclusion ............................................................................................................... 18

II I. DEMONSTRATION OF PERMANENT AND ENFORCEABLE

IMPROVEMENT ................................................................................................. 19 A. Baseline (2002) Emissions Inventory .................................................................... 20 B. Attainment Year (2007) Emissions Inventory

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

C. C ontrol Measures

................................ ................................................................... 22 1. Stationary Point Sources ....................................................................................... 24 2. Hig hway Vehicle Sources ..................................................................................... 26

3. Nonr oad Sources ................................................................................................... 29 4. Stationary Area Sources ........................................................................................ 30

I V. MAINTENANCE PLAN ...................................................................................... 31Table of Tables

Table I-1: Reading Area Annual PM 2.5 Concentrations

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

T able I-2: Reading Area 98 th % of 24-Hour PM 2.5 Concentrations .............................. 5

T able I-3: Reading Area Annual PM 2.5 Design Values

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

T able I-4: Reading Area 24-Hour PM 2.5 Design Values

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

T able I-5: Reading Area Monthly Mean Temperature (°F) ......................................... 9 Table I-6: Reading Area Precipitation (inches) ........................................................... 10

T able I-7: EPA’s Transport Rule Modeling Results for the PM 2.5 Standard for Pennsylvania Sites

................................ ................................................................... 15 Table III-1: 2002 Reading Area Annual Emissions (Tons per Year) ......................... 21

T able III-2: 2007 Reading Area Annual Emissions (Tons per Year) ......................... 22

T able III-3: Change in Reading Area Annual Emissions (Tons per Year) from 2002

to 2007 ...................................................................................................................... 23

T able III-4: Summary of Emission Totals (Tons) in 2007, 2017 and 2025 ................ 24

Table of Figures

Figure I-1: Pennsylvania’s 1997 PM 2.5 Nonattainment Areas ...................................... 3 Figure I-2: PM 2.5 Annual Concentration Trend ............................................................ 6

F igure I-3: PM 2.5 98 th % Concentration Trend ............................................................... 6

F igure I-4. Pie Chart of 2007 Reading Speciation Data

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

F igure I-5: Reading Area Monthly Mean Temperature (°F) ....................................... 9 Figure I-6: Reading Area Annual Precipitation (inches)

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

F igure I-7: Reading Area Population Trend ................................................................ 12

F igure I-8: Reading Area Population and Labor Force Trends ................................. 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 or dust particles and allergens (such as fragments of pollen or mold spores). Fine particle pollution or PM 2.5 describes particulate matter that 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 premature 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. These 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 Expectancy in the United

S tates” 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 occurring in the 1980s and 1990s

ha d 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 States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued PM 2 .5 national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) in 1997 after evaluating hundreds of health studies and

c onducting an extensive peer review process. The EPA established an annual primary (he alth-based) 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 average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations.

On December 17, 2004, the EPA issued air quality designations for the PM 2.5 standard based on air quality monitoring data from 2001-2003. The final designations were published in the Federal Register 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 the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.- 2

-

The Reading Area was one of eight areas in Pennsylvania, comprising all or parts of 21 Pennsylvania counties, designated by the EPA as nonattainment for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS. The Reading Area, consisting of Berks County in Pennsylvania, was designated

b y EPA as nonattainment because it violated the 1997 annual standard of 15.0 μg/m 3 based on 2001-03 monitoring data. The Reading 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 Reading Area now meets the 1997 PM 2 .5 NAAQS and that the emission reductions responsible for the air quality improvement are both

pe rmanent and enforceable. These analyses and the maintenance plan submitted concurrently demonstrate that the Reading Area has completed all criteria set forth in

S ection 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 f ollowing 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 improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions ( discussed in Section I and Section III ) ; and

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

This Request for Redesignation describes how the Reading 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) and 35 P.S. Section 4007.5. The Department provided notice of a public comment period and the opportunity for a hearing on the Maintenance Plan, 2007 comprehensive inventory required by Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA, and this Request for Redesignation on September 21, 2013. The public comment period closed

Nove mber 1, 2013. The Department scheduled the public hearing to occur on October 30, 2013

, but no persons expressed interest in presenting testimony or attending. Therefore, the Department cancelled the hearing. No one submitted written comments.- 3

-

I. DEMONSTRATION OF ATTAINMENT AND AIR QUALITY TRENDS

ANALYSIS

On December 17, 2004, the EPA issued air quality designations for the 1997 PM 2.5 standard based on air quality monitoring data from 2001-2003. The final designations were published in the Federal Register 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 the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Commonwealth or Pennsylvania).

The Reading Area was one of eight areas in Pennsylvania, comprising all or parts of 21 Pennsylvania counties, designated by the EPA as nonattainment for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS. The Reading Area, consisting of Berks County in Pennsylvania, was designated

a s nonattainment because it violated the 1997 annual standard of 15.0 μg/m 3 based on 2001-03 monitoring data. The Reading 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- 4

-

Air quality in the Reading Area has improved since the EPA’s original designations. The Reading Area’s annual PM 2.5 design value has decreased over the 2001 to 2012 time frame. The Reading Area’s design value for 2003 (based on data from 2001 through 2003 ) was 16.4 μg/m 3 . The Reading Area’s 2012 design value (based on data from 2010 through 2012) was 10. 9 μg/m 3 . Following EPA criteria, a PM 2.5 design value below 15.0 μg/m 3 is considered to be attainment. Concentrations are expected to remain lower than 15 μg/m 3

ove r the next decade.

On September 25, 2009 (74 FR 48863), the EPA determined that the Reading Area had

attained the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS (“Clean Data Determination”). EPA’s Clean Data

D etermination was based on quality-assured, quality-controlled and certified ambient air

moni toring data that show the area has mon ito red attainment based on 2006 through 2008

da ta. This final action suspended the requirements for this area to submit attainment

de monstrations and associated reasonably available control measures, reasonable further progress plans, contingency measures and other planning State Implementation 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

R eading Area remains nonattainment for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS until the Commonwealth submits, and EPA approves, a Request for Redesignation and a Maintenance Plan showing the area can maintain the standard for at least 10 years.

A. Design Value Determination

The ambient air quality analysis is based on PM 2 .5 data measured at Berks County

moni toring sites. The ambient air quality data analysis for PM 2 .5 was completed using the appropriate regulations and guidance documents. Monitoring procedures were determined

in accordance with 40 CFR Part 58. The 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 monitoring concentrations in the Reading

Ar ea. The Department moved the Berks County monitor twice between 2005 and 2007.

The first location (EPA’s Air Quality System ( AQS ) monitor #42011009) was located at Morgantown Road and Prospect Street in Reading. The Department lost the lease for that location, and, in 2006, moved the monitor to a temporary location at 503 North 6 th Street in Reading (AQS monitor # 420110010). Finally, in 2007, the monitor was moved to its new permanent location, 1059 Arnold Road in Reading (AQS monitor #420110011). As

discusse d in EPA’s technical support document for the 2006 PM 2.5 designations, EPA considers these monitoring locations to be one and the same for calculating design values.

EPA ba sed the Reading Area’s Clean Data Determination (74 FR 48863) on qualitya ssured, quality-controlled and certified ambient air monitoring data for 2006 through 2008, based on the combined data for the monitoring sites.- 5

-

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 Reading Area. Table I-2 contains the 98 th

pe rcentile of 24-hour concentrations for each year. In both tables, “X” indicates that data was collected at the monitoring site for part of the year and combined with data collected at another monitoring site to calculate the combined design value shown on the bottom row of each table. The 2001 through 2012 trend lines for annual concentrations and 98 th
percentile of 24-hour concentrations 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 concentrations are both negative, indicating decreasing concentrations. The slopes of the annual mean and

the 24-hour concentrations indicate declines of 0.65 and 1.98 μ g/m 3 per year, respectively, over the 2001 through 2012 timeframe.

Table I-1: Reading Area Annual PM 2.5 Concentrations

Annual Mean

Site Name and

FRM ID 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Reading

42

- 011

- 0009 16.5 16.7 16.1 15.6 16.8 X

Reading Temporary

42

- 011

- 0010 X X

Reading Airport

42

- 011

- 0011 X 12.5 10.9 10 11.3 11.3

Reading

Combined 13.9 14.3

Ta ble I -2: Reading Area 98 th % of 24-Hour PM 2.5 Concentrations

Annual 98% Concentration

Site Name and

FRM ID 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Reading

42

- 011

- 0009 43 48.5 45 33.1 39.4 X

Reading Temporary

42

- 011

- 0010 X X

Reading Airport

42

- 011

- 0011 X 28.4 28.8 26.7 26.4 26.3

Reading

Combined 36.9 36.2- 6

- Figure I-2: PM 2.5 Annual Concentration Trend

Figure I-3 : PM 2 .5 98 th % Concentration Trend

Tables I-3 and I-4 contain the Reading Area’ s annual and 24-hour PM 2.5 design values calculated from the 2001 through 2012 monitoring data.

Design values for the annual PM 2 .5 NAAQS show a steady declining trend. The Reading Area was designated as nonattainment based on the 2001 through 2003 annual design- 7

-

value of 16.4 μg/m 3 . The 24-hour design value for that time period was 46 μg/m 3

. Compared with the 2001 through 2003 design values, the annual design value for 2010 throug h 2012 has decreased by 34% and the 24-hour design value by 43 %. The annual and

24 -hour PM 2.5 design values for the Reading Area are shown below in Tables I-3 and I-4, respectively.

Table I-3: Reading Area Annual PM 2 .5 Design Values



### 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS = 15 ug/m3

Design Value

Site Nam e and FRM

ID 1999

-

2001 2000

- 2002 2001

- 2003 2002

- 2004 2003

- 2005 2004

- 2006 2005

- 2007 2006

- 2008 2007

- 2009 2008

- 2010 2009

- 2011 2010

- 2012

Reading

42

- 011

- 0009 15.6 16.7 16.4 16.1 16.2

Reading Temporary

42

- 011

- 0010 Reading Airport

42

- 011

- 0011 11.1 10.7 10.9

Reading

Combined 15.5 15 13.6 12.6

Table I-4: Reading Area 24-Hour PM 2 .5 Design Values



### 1997 24

- Hour PM2.5 NAAQS 3 year 98% = 65 ug/m3
Design Value

Site Name

and FRM

ID 1999

-

2001 2000

- 2002 2001

- 2003 2002

- 2004 2003

- 2005 2004

- 2006 2005

- 2007 2006

- 2008 2007

- 2009 2008

- 2010 2009

- 2011 2010

- 2012

Reading

42

- 011

- 0009 39 43 46 42 39

Reading Temporary

42

- 011

- 0010 Reading Airport

42

- 011

- 0011 28 27 26

Reading

Combined 36 38 34 31- 8

-

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 formed 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 anthropogenic VOCs. This is important because sulfates, nitrates, ammonium and organic carbon are major contributors to the total PM 2.5 , making up approximately 79% of the annual PM 2.5 concentration observed in the Reading Area in 2007.

Figure I-4. Pie Chart of 2007 Reading 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 formation during the colder winter months. In 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 meteorological patterns have contributed to the

lower PM 2.5 concentrations observed in the Reading Area, temperature and precipitation trends over the last 10 years were examined.- 9

-

The data used in the trends analysis is from the Global Historical Climatology Network (GHCN) database for the Reading Spaatz Field station. 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 Reading Area for 2001 through 2011. Figure I-5 graphically displays the data.

T able I-5: Reading Area Monthly Mean Temperature (° F)

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

2001 28.2 33.6 37.6 51.3 61.7 69.8 71.6 75.2 63.7 55.0 48.4 39.9

2002 35.8 37.2 42.1 54.1 59.4 71.1 77.0 76.8 68.9 51.3 41.7 30.7

2003 25.3 28.6 40.6 50.4 57.9 68.7 74.7 75.4 65.7 51.6 47.1 34.0

2004 23.9 31.5 42.8 52.3 67.1 68.9 73.0 72.5 67.5 52.9 45.7 34.0

2005 28.8 33.4 36.9 54.0 57.7 74.7 78.3 76.6 70.3 56.5 45.7 30.2

2006 38.1 32.9 42.3 53.6 62.1 70.7 77.0 74.3 63.7 52.9 48.0 40.3

2007 34.7 25.2 40.6 48.9 64.0 72.0 73.9 74.8 68.5 61.5 41. 7 34.3

2008 32.9 32.4 41.4 53.4 58.1 74.1 76.3 71.2 67.1 52.7 43.0 34.7

2009 25.2 34.0 42.1 53.1 62.6 69.3 72.0 74.7 64.9 53.2 48.6 33.6

2010 30.9 30.4 47.5 56.3 65.5 74.5 78.8 75.7 69.3 55.6 44.6 30.7

2011 26.2 33.1 40.8 51.3 65.5 73.2 80.4 73.9 68.4 56.3 48.4 39.7

Figure I-5 : Reading Area Monthly Mean Temperature (° F)- 10

-

The Reading Area was designated nonattainment 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

norma l 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 Reading Area’s Clean Data Determination was based on 2006 through 2008 data, and the Reading Area has monitored attainment since that time.

Ex amination of the temperature data from 2006 through 2011 shows normal variation in

se asonal temperatures but no evidence of unusual patterns that would be expected to

re press PM 2 .5 format ion.

2. Precipitation Trends

Table I-6 presents monthly and annual precipitation data for the Reading Area for 2001 through 2011. Figure I-6 graphically displays the annual precipitation data.

T able I-6: Reading Area Precipitation (inches)

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

Total

2001 1.8 1.2 3.8 2.8 3.7 5.8 4.3 1.2 5.2 0.7 1.2 1.7 33.4

2002 2.1 0.6 3.6 4.1 4.4 4.5 0.4 3.7 3.5 7.1 4.1 4.8 42.8

2003 1.6 2.8 3.5 2.4 3.1 7.2 4.0 3.5 9.3 4.8 3.2 4.1 49.5

2004 1.4 3.1 2.0 4.0 3.7 5.7 9.4 4.8 7.8 2.6 3.5 3.3 51.3

2005 3.5 1.6 3.7 5.0 1.0 1.4 8.2 1.7 0.6 4.9 3.1 3.6 38.4

2006 4.2 1.9 0.6 4.0 1.4 8.5 5.0 3.9 5.3 3.8 4.8 2.2 45.7

2007 2.7 2.5 3.8 4.8 2.4 5.0 3.4 5.2 1.0 4.8 3.4 5.0 44.0

2008 1.1 6.0 4.0 0.9 3.6 1.7 3.8 2.3 5.8 2.1 1.9 6.2 39.5

2009 1.8 0.5 1.8 2.4 4.9 6.1 4.2 7.4 3.3 4.6 1.8 5.0 43.7

2010 1.6 1.8 3.7 2.8 4.4 2.6 2.5 1.4 6.7 3.7 2.5 1.9 35.5

2011 1.7 2.7 5.2 4.0 5.4 3.1 2.2 6.9 11.6 3.5 4.7 3.4 54.4- 11

- Figure I-6 : Re ading Area Annual Precipitation (inches)

Examination of the 2001 through 2003 precipitation data indicates both drier and wetter

than usua l years within the timeframe. Examination of the precipitation data from 2006 throug h 2011 also shows variation in precipitation amounts. Throughout these years the Reading Area monitored attainment of the standard. There is no indication from the data that unusual precipitation patterns contributed to the lower PM 2.5 concentrations in recent years in which the Reading Area monitored attainment of the PM 2.5 NA AQS

.

D. Additional Trends

1. Population Trends

The Reading Area, which consists of Berks County, has had significant population growth over the last decade. Berks County’s population increased approximately 10% between

the 2000 a nd 2010 Censuses. According to the Bureau of the Census, Berks County’s

20 10 population wa s 411,442 people, ranking the county ninth largest in population in Pennsylvania.

Population increases correspond with increased emissions from some types of emission

sourc es and, therefo re
, can result in increased pollution levels. While Berks County’s population has grown approximately 10% over the last decade, this growth has not resulted

in i ncreased PM 2.5 concentrations. In fact, the county’s PM 2.5 concentrations have declined in spite of the increase in population.- 12

- Figure I-7 : Re ading Area Population Trend

2. Economic Trends

Economic trends could have impacts on emissions and consequently affect PM 2.5 concentrations in the Reading Area. The two factors considered here include estimated

labor force changes in Berks County and overall economic activity in Pennsylvania as

mea sured 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

C oincident Index data was obtained from the Philadelphia Reserve Bank.

Figure I-8 shows Berks 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 P ennsylvania 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 Berks County.- 13

- Figure I-8 : Reading Area Population and Labor Force Trends

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

- Atlantic Information Office The database containing "State and local industry employment and earnings

- monthly" data was

accessed from the foll owing site:
http://www.bls.gov/ro3/data.htm

Figure I-9 : P ennsylvania and National Coincident Indexes from the Philadelphia

Federal 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/- 14

-

The Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia produces a monthly coincident 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 deflated 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. Modeling Analyses

Modeling results for the EPA’s Cross-State Air Pollution Rule ( 76 F R 48207 ; August 8, 2011) 1 ( Transp ort Rule ) were examined to determine if the model results support redesignating the Reading Area to attainment. EPA’s analysis indicates that the Re ading

Area would attain the 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 model 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 time periods. Using this model, EPA

sim ulated the emissions from many different sources of pollution (such as electric

g enerating units (EGU), and mobile sources). All of the Transport Rule CAMx simulations used meteorology for 2005 derived from simulations of the Pennsylvania State University / National Center for Atmospheric Research Mesoscale Model (MM5) version

3.7.4. The 2005 emissions of SO 2 , NO X , VO C, 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

Doc ument for the Transport Rule. Air quality modeling was performed to simulate ozone

a nd PM 2.5 concentrations for the 2005 base year, a 2012 “no CAIR” base case, a 2014 “no CAIR” base case, and the 2014 remedy scenario. Table I-7 displays the results of EPA’s

a nalysis for the Reading Area. EPA’s analysis indicates that the Reading Area would

a ttain the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS, even in the absence of either CAIR or the Transport Rule. The results support redesignating the Reading Area to attainment for the PM 2 .5 NAAQS.

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

of SIP Approva ls .”- 15

-

Table I-7 : EPA’s Transport Rule Modeling Results for the PM 2 .5 Standard for

P ennsylvania Sites

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

II. SIP APPROVALS AND APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS

In order for EPA to approve a redesignation of a nonattainment area to attainment, the applicable SIP revision must be fully approved under Section 110(k) of the CAA. In addition, the state must have met all requirements applicable to the area under CAA Section 110 and Part D—Plan Requirements for Nonattainment Areas. The specific requirements applicable to the Reading Area can be found in Sections 110(a)(2), and

P art D Sections 172(c) (relating to nonattainment 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 Reading Area.

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 rulemaking in another state, [ 1] only the Section 110 and Part 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

re quirements after an area is redesignated to attainment.

The requirements of CAA Section 110(a)(2) that are statewide requirements and that are

not linked to the PM 2.5 nonattainment status of the Reading Area are not applicable

re quirements for purposes of review of the Commonwealth’s PM 2 .5 redesignation request.

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

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

-

However, EPA requires that the Commonwealth’s Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) requ irements 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

de signated as a nonattainment area meet the applicable requirements 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 applicable 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) requirements are fully approved under Section 110(k) of the CAA. The Maintenance Plan associated with this Request for Redesignation for the Reading Area is a SIP revision for an area designated as a nonattainment area and meets the applicable requirements of Part D of Subchapter I of the CAA; therefore, the Maintenance Plan associated with this Request for Redesignation

mee ts the requirements of Section 110(a)(2)(I). Please see the discussion below concerning Part D (plan requirements for nonattainment areas).

B . Part D - Plan Requirements for Nonattainment Areas

1. Section 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 available control measures, reasonable further progress, inventory data, and permitting requirements.

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

Area had attained the 1997 PM 2 .5 NAAQS . EPA based this Clean Data Determination

upon c omplete, quality-assured, quality-controlled, and certified ambient air monitoring

data that sh owe d that the area monitored attainment of the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS during the 2006 throug h 2008 monitoring period. The Clean Data Determination suspended the

re quirements for this area to submit an attainment demonstration, associated reasonably

a vailable 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 Cl ean Data Determination. In fulfillment of this requirement, the 2007 inventory,

whic h also serves as the attainment year inventory, is being submitted as part of the

Maintena nce Plan, submitted concurrently with this Request for Redesignation.- 17

-

2

. Section 173 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 Title 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 Chapter 123);

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

 Construction, Modification, Reactivation and Operation of Sources, including plan approval, prevention of significant deterioration, new source review, operating 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 federally mandated requirements in Sections 110, 172, 173 and 182(a) of the CAA.

EPA ha s approved all of these regulations as SIP revisions, 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 Commonwealth adopted and incorporated EPA’s general conformity rule (40 CFR Part 93, Subpart B) by reference in its entirety in 25 Pa. Code Section 127.802. The general conformity regulation describes procedures to determine if federally-financed, non-transportation projects are in conformity 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 program), long range plans (LRP or plan), and individual transportation projects with the requirements of the CAA and the SIP for the specific- 18

-

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

c onsidered Section 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 emissions of PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X , VOC and NH 3 for the maintenance demonstration. Pennsylvania also assessed NH 3 em issions although there are no major sources of NH 3 in the Reading Area. Please see Section III-C-1 relating to control measures for stationary

sourc es for a discussion of the stationary source control measures in place in the Reading

Area.

C. Conclusion

The requirements of Section 110(a) and Subpart D of the CAA have been fulfilled in the

R eading Area.- 19

- I II . DEMONSTRATION OF PERMANENT AND ENFORCEAB LE

IMPROVEMENT

This section provides an assessment of the PM 2.5 and PM 2.5 precursor emissions at the time the Reading Area was originally designated as nonattainment for PM 2.5 and at the time

when this area attained the PM 2.5 NAAQS. A 2002 (baseline) inventory of PM 2.5 and

PM 2.5 precursor emissions is used to represent emissions during the PM 2.5 nonattainment

de signation period. A 2007 inventory is used to identify PM 2 .5 and PM 2.5 precursor emissions during the period when the Reading Area 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 implementation rule), the EPA established general presumptive policies for assessing which PM 2.5 precursors should be evaluated for possible controls. The EPA required states to evaluate control measures for SO 2 and primary PM 2.5 in all locations. The EPA required 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 required 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 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 implementation rule for the 1997 PM 2.5 standard. After considering the petitions

a nd 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 remains in effect unless and until

EPA rescinds it or promulgates a replacement. In any event, the Maintenance Plan

a ccompanying this Request for Redesignation demonstrates maintenance of the standard consistent with the court’s ruling.

In general, the court’s decision could affect an area’s nonattainment classification, certain

de adlines, 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). Si nce the Reading Area is already attaining the NAAQS, however, those considerations are not relevant for this Request for Redesignation and the

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

spec ifically 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

a t 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- 20

-

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; Section 189(e) also requires EPA to issue guidelines regarding the application of Subsection (e).

P ennsylvania assessed emissions of PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X , VOC and NH 3 for the maintenance

d emonstration. Pennsylvania also assessed emissions of NH 3 although there are no major stationary sources of NH 3 in the Reading Area.

This Request for Redesignation 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 The section first

describes the PM 2 .5 and PM 2.5 precursor emission estimates for the Reading Area. These

inventor ies have been developed in accordance with EPA emission inventory preparation guidance. The section then presents information about the permanent and enforceable

c ontrol measures that have been implemented in the Reading Area to produce the PM 2.5 and PM 2.5 precursor emission reductions that have occurred between these years and that

will provide emission reductions ensuring maintenance of the standard.

A. Baseline (2002) Emissions Inventory

An e missions inventory for the baseline year, 2002, was developed for PM 10 , PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X , VOC and NH 3 in accordance with EPA guidance. Th e baseline year inventory represents the emissions present when the Reading Area did not meet the PM 2 .5 standard. 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 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 values are adjusted to remove any double counting.

 “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,

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.- 21

- recreational marine vessels, commercial marine vessels, locomotives, ships, and

aircraft.

Pennsylvania and other Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic states participated in a regional

e ffo rt to refine the emissions inventory and to compile a regional emissions inventory. The Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association (MARAMA) coordinated that

re gional effort, which allowed states to pool their resources to compile a regional

e missions inventory for the purpose of conducting the regional modeling analysis used in

P ennsylvania’s air quality management planning efforts to attain the 8-hour ozone NAAQS

and the PM 2.5 NAAQS, and to prepare the Regional Haze SIP revision.

T able III-1: 2002 Reading Area Annual Emissions (Tons per Year)

Reading 2002 PM 2.5 PM 10 SO 2 NO X VOC NH 3 Stationary Point Sources 577 1,265 14,834 5,363 1,740 9

Area Sources 2,608 14,299 2,131 1,502 8,819 4,284
Highway Vehicle Sources 459 530 306 14,922 5,237 180

Non

- R oad Sources 212 221 242 3,323 2,331 2

Totals 3,857 16,315 17,514 25,110 18,128 4,475

A summary of the 2002 inventory is shown in Table III-1. The 2002 inventory is not

dire ctly comparable to the 2007, 2017 and 2025 inventories because of changes in

in ventory methodology and the adjustment made to account for condensable PM emissions from EGUs in the 2007, 2017 and 2025 emission inventories. The Technical Appendices

to the Maintenance Plan contain more detailed information about the 2002 emissions for

each sector.

B. Attainment Year (2007) Emissions Inventory

A 2007 inventory of PM 10 , PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X , VOC and NH 3 emissions for the Reading Area is used to identify emissions during the period when attainment of the PM 2.5 NAAQS was demonstrated for the Reading Area. A summary of the 2007 inventory is provided in

Table III-2.- 22

- Table III-2: 2007 Reading Area Annual Emissions (Tons per Year)

Reading 2007 PM 2.5 PM 10 SO 2 NO X VOC NH 3 Stationary Point Sources 1,272 1,922 15,140 5,793 1,237 21

Area Sources 1, 859 5,330 2,389 1,289 5,877 3,632
Highway Vehicle Sources 383 452 81 11,374 4,415 163

Non

- Road Sources 191 205 106 2,532 2,096 2

Totals 3,704 7,908 17,716 20,988 13,625 3,818

The emissions inventory shows an apparent increase in PM 2 .5 emissions from stationary sources from 2002 to 2007, in part because the 2002 inventory was based on emissions

re ported to the Department by facilities and did not include condensable PM for many facilities. The 2007 EGU inventory was augmented utilizing the updated condensable

e mission factors for EGUs developed for MARAMA in 2008 to calculate condensable PM

e missions where that data was missing.

Sulfur dioxide emissions in 2007 were 202 tons (1%) more than they were in 2002. The

SO 2 emissions from stationary point sources and area sources increased while the SO 2 emissions from highway vehicle and non-road sources decreased. The small increase can be attributed to typical year to year emission fluctuation and is not significant.

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 contributing factors in Section I of th is

R equest fo r Redesignation, this section describes the permanent and enforceable federal and state measures that provided PM 2 .5 , SO 2 , NO X and VOC emission reductions from 2002 to 2007 to bring the Reading Area into attainment and measures that will assure

maintena nce of the standard. In the EPA’s implementation rule, the EPA established

g eneral presumptive policies for assessing which PM 2.5 precursors should 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 noted that PM2.5 precursors are presumptively regulated in PM2.5 nonattainment areas under Subpart 4, pointing

spec ifically 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

a t 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 determines that major stationary sources do not contribute significantly 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- 23

-

demonstration. Emissions of NH 3 were assessed, although there are no major stationary

sourc es of NH 3 in the Reading Area.

PM 2.5 , NO X , VOC and NH 3 emissions in the Reading Area decreased by 4%, 16 %, 25% and 17%, respectively, from 2002 to 2007. Over the same time period, SO 2 emissions

in creased slightly, by 1 percent. The SO 2 emissions from stationary point sources and area

sources increased while the SO 2 emissions from highway vehicle and non-road sources decreased. The small increase can be attributed to typical year to year emission fluctuation and is not considered significant by the Department. As noted above, the decrease in PM 2.5 emissions is a conservative estimate because the 2007 inventory was augmented to account

for condensable PM.

A summary of the quantity of emission reductions from 2002 to 2007 is included in Table

III

- 3. (Negative values indicate emission reductions.)

Table III-3: Change in Reading Area Annual Emissions (Tons per Year) from 2002 to

2007

Difference between 2007

and 2002 PM 2.5 SO 2 NO X VOC NH 3 Stationary Point Sources 695 305 431

- 503 11

Area Sources

- 750 258

- 213

- 2,942

- 651

Highway Vehicle Sources

- 77

- 225

- 3,548

- 823

- 17

Nonroad Sources

- 22

- 136

- 791

- 235 0

TOTAL

- 153 203

- 4,122

- 4,503

- 657

This section also 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 total emissions in 2007 and projected estimates for 2017 and 2025 is

include d 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 Reading Area are anticipated to be lower than they were in 2007. This means that the projected growth in

e missions is smaller than anticipated emission reductions from control measures for all poll utants, except NH 3 , in the nonattainment area. 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 are all projected to decline. Each measure is explained in greater detail in the following

sections.- 24

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

Reading PM 2.5 SO 2 NO X VOC NH 3 2007 3,704 17,716 20,988 13,625 3,818

2017 * 3,307 15,567 12,386 10,697 4,119

2025 * 3,215 15,908 10,186 9,692 4,368
*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 emissions in Table III-4 reflect inclusion of that safety margin.

1. Stationary Point Sources

Background. 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

c ommence 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 plants and internal combustion engines, with emission reductions to commence

Ma y 1, 2005. These regulations were approved by EPA as a SIP revision on

S eptember 29, 2006 (71 FR 57428).

Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). In 2005, EPA adopted CAIR (70 FR 25162;

Ma y 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, 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,

P ennsylvania terminated the NO X Budget Trading Program and transitioned to the federal CAIR for large electric 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

we re 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, 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, N orth 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- 25

-

challenge the court vacated CSAPR. In that ruling, the court ordered EPA to continue administering CAIR pending the promulgation of a valid replacement (See, EM E 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 SIP revision also

established emission limits for the non-EGUs and other units that were subject to the

C ommonwealth’s NO X Budget Trading Program but are not subject to the CAIR NO X Oz one Season Trading Program. Th ese units must continue monitoring NO X emissions and must meet an emissions cap. Each unit has an allowable emission rate, calculated by

J anuary 31 of each year, based on the previous ozone season’s heat input. If the combined

NO X ozone season emissions from all of the se units exceed the statewide ozone season

e mission cap of 3,438 tons, each unit that exceeds 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

a llowable 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

un der 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

c orrections. The Commonwealth retires any unused amount from this set aside each year.

I t 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

we re 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

De cember 10, 2009, and codified in the SIP at 40 CFR §52.2020(c)(1).

Cement kilns and large stationary internal combustion engines. The CAIR SI P revision also included regulations updating the cement manufacturing 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 th a t were subject

to the NO X SIP Call were required to surrender NO X SIP Call allowances if they exceed ed

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 season allowances, the Department

modi fied the regulations to require surrender of CAIR NO X ozone season and CAIR NO X annual allowance s for emission limit exceedances.

The Department’s regulations for large stationary internal combustion engines and cement

kil ns, codified in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 145, Subchapters B and C, respectively, were

a pproved by EPA on December 10, 2009, and codified at 40 CFR § 51.2020(c)(1). An

a mendment to the Department’s regulation for cement kilns to reduce NO X emissions- 26

-

effective 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).

Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD). The PSD program is a preconstruction 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 in areas attaining the NAAQS. The D epartment’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). The federal PSD regulations codified in 40 CFR Part 52 are incorporated by referenc e in their entirety in 25 Pa. Code § 127.83 (relating to adoption by reference). The PSD program requires any new source to implement Best Available Control Technology (BACT) and limits a new source's allowable impact on the

environment.

Best Available Technology (BAT) Program. Pennsylvania regulations require, in

25 Pa. Code § 127.1, that new sources in Pennsylvania must control the emission of air pollutants to the maximum extent, consistent with the best available technology as determined by the Depa rtment 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 attainable through the use of the

best availa

ble technology. Pennsylvania regulations define “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

ma ximum 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

a pproved by EPA on July 30, 1996

, and codified in the SIP at 40 CFR §52.2020(c)(1)

.

The following federally enforceable programs, already incorporated in the

C ommonwealth’s SIP, will also reduce emissions.

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 Section 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 issued by the De partment for aff ected sources.

2. Highway Vehicle Sources

Even with increases in vehicle miles travelled (VMT) that occurred between 2002 and 2007, a nd 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- 27

-

fewer emissions, compensating for the increase in VMT. These decreases can be attributed to the programs described below.

F ederal 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 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 Section 177 of the CAA, the Pennsylvania Environmental Qua lity Board (EQB) adopted the Pennsylvania Clean Vehicles Program (28 Pa. B. 5873 ; 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 identical to the low emission standards adopted by California. The regulation does not 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 of the CA LEV program through MY 2005. These regulations affected

ve hicles 6,000 pounds and less and were the regulations in effect for new motor vehicles in the baseline year, 2002.

In 1999, the EPA promulgated regulations more stringent than NLEV (Tier 2), starting with MY 2004. The NLEV program was replaced 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 subject to the Tier 2

re quirements.

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 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

Ve hicle Program as a revision to the Commonwealth’s SIP on January 24, 2012 ( 77 F R 3386).

Heavy-Duty Diesel Control Programs. 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

manuf acturers 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 reductions from these programs are reflected in the future year emission inventories, as

pr ovided in the Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES) model.

I n 2002, the EQB adopted the Heavy-Duty Diesel Emissions Control Program for model

y ears starting after May 2004. The program incorporates California standards 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 stringent federal standards affecting MY 2007 and beyond. However, EPA’s MOVES model already assumed that the engines

would c omply with consent decree standards, even without an enforcement mechanism. The Department has used MOVES defaults to calculate emissions from MY 2005 and 2006 hig hway 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 f or NO X and VOCs. For gasoline engines, the standards were phased in during

MY 2008 a nd 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

e mission 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 required most highway diesel fuel to contain no more than 15 parts per million (ppm) of

sulfur , beginning in the fall of 2006. 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 used 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 Reading 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 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 emissions program as a SIP revision on December 1, 2003. EPA approved 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 contributes to air pollution. By removin g most sulfur from gasoline, new- 29

-

advanced emission controls will work 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 and 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 p rovided 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. Veh icles meeting Tier 2 emission standards are 77 to 95 percent cleaner

than earlier models.

Currently, EPA has proposed a rulemaking reducing sulfur limits in gasoline further with a Tier 3 Low Sulfur Gasoline program (78 FR 29816 ; May 21, 2013). The Tier 3 program would reduce sulfur levels in gasoline to 10 parts per million or lower. When implemented, this program, by 2030, would increase the effectiveness of vehicle emission controls even further and reduce tailpipe emissions of NO X by 29 percent and V OC by 26

percent.

3. Nonroad Sources

The EPA has adopted a series of regulations 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

im plementation dates, can be found at www.epa.gov/nonroad. The Department used the

a ssumptions 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 sulfur content of diesel used in nonroad diesel engines. The

re duction in fuel sulfur content pr events damage to the more advanced emission control

s ystems 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 fuel, 15 ppm; this requirement began applying in 2012 to locomotive and marine diesel fuel. EPA adopted 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 April 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 1000 ppm sulfur for use in Category 3 marine- 30

-

vessels. This requirement does not impact the Reading Area because the Reading 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 consumer 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). Additional regulations were adopted on

Oc tober 11, 2008, submitted to the EPA as a SIP revision on March 11, 2009, and approved on October 18, 2010 (75 FR 63717).

Adhesives, Sealants, Primers and Solvents. The EQB adopted a regulation in 2010 to control VOC emissions from adhesives, sealants, primers 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).- 31

- IV. MAINTENANCE PLAN

The Maintenance Plan for the Reading Area is being submitted to EPA for approval as a SIP revision concurrently with this Request for Redesignation. The Maintenance Plan

shows that the 1997 PM 2 .5 NAAQS will be maintained for at least 10 years after redesignation. Eight years following redesignation, the Commonwealth will submit a revised plan that ensures attainment through 2035.

The 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, which are all projected to decline. The following state and federal programs will ensure the

c ontinuing decline of SO 2 , NO X , direct PM 2.5 , and VOC emission s:

 CAIR;

 Emission limits for large industrial boilers;

 State regulation of cement kilns, large stationary internal combustion engines, and

small er sources of NO X ;

 State regulations incorporating by reference the federal Prevention of Significant

Deteri oration (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 federal heavy-duty diesel emission control programs;

 Federal fuel programs for highway vehicles and nonroad mobile equipment; and

 Federal regulation of off-road 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,

a nd, 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- 32

-

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 Bulletin 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 nonetheless assist the Reading Area in maintaining air

qua lity.

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 inventories 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 after redesignation of the area.- 33

- 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 United States Environmental Protection Agency EQB Environmental Quality Board

ERC Emission Reduction Credit

FAA Federal Aviation Administration 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 Maintenance IRRC Independent Regulatory Review Commission LDGV Light Duty Gasoline Vehicles LDGT Light Duty Gasoline Trucks LRP Long Range Plan MACT Maximum Achievable Control Technology MARAMA Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association

MM5 Mesoscale Model

MOVES Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization

MY Model Year NAAQS Na tional Ambient Air Quality Standard NAICS North American Industry Classification System NEI National Emissions Inventory

NH 3 Ammonia NLEV National Low Emission Vehicle (program) NMIM National Mobile Inventory Model- 34

-

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 Particulates

PM 10 Particulate Matter less than 10 microns in diameter ppm parts per million

PSD Prevention 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

μ g/m 3 M icrogram per cubic meter μm Micrometer

VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled

VOC Volatile Organic Compound

ZEV Zero Emissions Vehicle

# Commonwealth of Pennsylvania



# S TATE 

# I MPLEMENTATION 

# P LAN 

# R EVISION 

# :

M AINTENANCE 

# P LAN AND



# C OMPREHENSIVE 

# I NVENTORY



# R EADING 

# N ONATTAINMENT 

# A REA



# 1997 F INE 

# P ARTICULATE 

# M ATTER



# N ATIONAL 

# A MBIENT 

# A IR 

# Q UALITY 

# S TANDARDS



# N OVEMBER 

# 2013

Bureau of Air Quality Pennsylvania 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.]Table of Contents

I. INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW ........................................................................... 1

A. He alth 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. P ublic Participation

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

II. EMISSION INVENTORIES.......................................................................................... 8

A. Em issions Inventory Methodology for Baseline Year (2002) and Attainment Year (2007) Emissions

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

B . Baseline Year (2002) Emissions ............................................................................ 13

C. A ttainment Year (2007) Annual Emissions (Tons per Year) ............................. 13

D. G rowth Projection Methodologies for 2017 and 2025 ........................................ 14 E. Interim Year (2017) Emissions .............................................................................. 17

F. Maintenance Year (2025) Emissions ..................................................................... 18

G. Maintenance Plan Emissions Test ........................................................................ 18

III. PERMANENT AND ENFORCEABLE CONTROL MEASURES .......................... 20

A. Pe rmanent and Enforceable Control Measures

................................ .................. 20

1. S tationary Point Sources ....................................................................................... 22 2. Hig hway Vehicle Sources ..................................................................................... 25

3. Nonr oad Sources ................................................................................................... 27 4. Stationary Area Sources ........................................................................................ 28

B . Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for Transportation Conformity .................... 29

V. V ERIFICATION OF CONTINUED ATTAINMENT ................................................ 33

V I. CONTINGENCY MEASURES ................................................................................. 33

Table of Tables

Table II-1: Reading Area 2002 Annual Emissions (Tons per Year) .......................... 13

T able II-2: Reading Area 2007 Annual Emissions (Tons per Year) .......................... 14

T able II-3: Reading Area VMT (Miles) and Vehicle Emissions (Tons per Year)

.... 17 Table II-4: Reading Area Projected 2017 Emissions (Tons per Year) ...................... 18

T able II-5: Reading Area Projected 2025 Emissions (Tons per Year) ...................... 18

T able III-1: Summary of Emission Reductions (Tons) from 2007 to 2025 ................ 21

f rom Control Measures

................................ .................................................................. 21 Table III-2: Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (Tons per Year) ................................. 30 Table III-3 Comparison of Safety Margin to Total Anticipated Emission Reductions

in 2017 and 2025 ...................................................................................................... 30 Table III-4: Comparison of 2025 On-Road Mobile VOC, NH 3 , and SO 2 Emissions to the Total Projected 2025 Inventory ....................................................................... 31APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: S TATIONARY P OINT S OURCES

A

- 1 Methodology

– Preparation of Pennsylvania Point Source Inventories and Instructions for Completing the Annual Emissions Reporting Forms

A

- 2 Facility Annual Emissions

– 2002

A

- 3 Facility Annual Emissions

– 2007

, 2017, 2025

A

- 4 Banked Emissions Reduction Credits

APPENDIX B: STATIONARY AREA SOURCES

B

- 1 Pennsylvania 2002 Area Source Criteria Air Pollutant Emission Estimation Methods (EH Pechan, Feb. 2004)

B

- 2 Pennsylvania 2007 Area Source Criteria Air Pollutan t Emission Estimation Methods (Dec. 2009)

B

- 3 Area Source Annual Emissions

– 2002

B

- 4 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 20 07 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

- 2 T echnical Support Document for the Developme nt 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 Dev elopment 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

APPENDIX D : H IGHWAY V EHICLE S OURCES I NVENTORY I NFORMATION

D

- 1 Mobile Source Highway Emissions Inventory

– An Explanation of Methodology

D

- 2 Highway Emissions Estimates

– 2002, 2007, 2017, 2025

D

- 3 MO VES Input Parameter Summa ry APPENDIX E : N ONROAD S OURC ES

E

- 1 Emissions Estimation Methodology

– 2002

E

- 2 Nonroad Source Emissions

– 2002

E

- 3 Nonroad Source Emissions

– 2007, 2017, 2025- 1

- I. INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW

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

a ir 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 that 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 premature 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. These 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 Expectancy in the United

S tates” 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 occurring in the 1980s and 1990s

ha d 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 States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued PM 2.5 national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) in 1997 after evaluating hundreds of health studies and

c onducting an extensive peer review process. The EPA established an annual primary (he alth-based) and secondary (welfare-based) standard of 15.0 μg/m 3 , ba sed 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 average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations.

On December 17, 2004, the EPA issued air quality designations for the PM 2.5 standard based on air quality monitoring data from 2001-2003. The final designations were published in the Federal Register 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. The EPA supplemental notice was published in the- 2

-

Federal Register on April 14, 2005 (70 FR 19844). Mercer County was the only county in

the Com monwealth of Pennsylvania (Commonwealth or Pennsylvania) affected by the Apr il 5, 2005, supplemental notice.

The Reading Area was one of eight areas in Pennsylvania designated by the EPA as

nona ttainment for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS. The eight areas comprise all or parts of 21

P ennsylvania counties. The EPA designated the Reading Area, consisting of Berks County in Pennsylvania, as nonattainment because the area violated the 1997 annual standard of 15.0 μ g/m 3 based on 2001-2003 monitoring data. The Reading Area did not violate the

1997 24- hour PM 2.5 NAAQS of 65 μg/m 3

.

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 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 compounds, 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 chemistry 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, clouds or fog. The contribution of different precursors will vary by location.

The principal forms of secondary PM 2.5 includ e:

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

 Nitrates, formed from emissions 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 volatile organic compounds ( VOCs) from incomplete combustion and evaporation from 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

nonattainment areas. In the EPA’s “Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule”- 3

-

(7 2 FR 20586 ; April 25, 2007) (the implementation rule), the EPA established general presumptive policies for assessing which PM 2.5 precursors should be evaluated for possible

controls. 1 In the implementation rule, the EP A r equired states to evaluate control

measures for SO 2 and primary PM 2.5 in all locations. The EPA required 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 do not significantly contribute to PM 2.5 concentrations

in the nonattainment area. The EPA required 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 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 decision, the court granted petitions for review that challenged EPA’s implementation rule. After considering the petitions and EPA’s response to them,

the c ourt 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 unde r Subpart 1, as EPA had done (706 F.3d at 437). Because the Court remanded rather than vacated the implementation

rule , the implementation rule remains in effect unless and until EPA rescinds it or

pr omulgates a replacement. In any event, this maintenance plan demonstrates maintenance

of the standard consistent with the court’s rulin g.

In general, the court’s decision could affect an area’s nonattainment classification, certain

de adlines, 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 Reading Area is already attaining the NAAQS, however, those considerations are not relevant for this 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 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 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; Section 189(e) also requires EPA to issue guidelines

re garding the application of Subsection (e). Pennsylvania assessed emissions of PM 2 .5 , SO 2 , NO X , VOC and NH 3 for the maintenance demonstration. Pennsylvania assessed

emissions of NH 3 although there are no major stationary sources of NH 3 in the Reading

Area.

This State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision provides emissions information for all poll utants ( PM 10 , PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X , VOC and NH 3 ), as required by EPA’s guidance

e ntitled, “Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate

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 SO 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

-

Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze.

R egulations.” 2

C. Purpose and Structure o f t his SIP Revision

In December 2004, after consultation with states and receipt of public input, the EPA

de signated eight areas in Pennsylvania, comprising all or parts of 21 Pennsylvania counties, as PM 2.5 nonattainment areas based on air quality 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 Reading Area will attain the standard by Apr il 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 attainment as quickly as possible.

However, on September 25, 2009 (74 FR 48863), the EPA determined that the Reading

Ar ea had attained the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS based on quality assured, quality controlled and certified ambient air monitoring data that show the area has monitored attainment based on

2006-200 8 data (“Clean Data Determination”). This final action suspended the

re quirements for this area to submit an attainment demonstration and associated reasonably

a vailable control measures, reasonable further progress plans, contingency measures and other planning SIP revisions related to the attainment of the 1997 PM 2 .5 NAAQS for so long as the area continues to attain the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS

. 3

The determination of attainment in the Clean Data Determination d id not “redesignate” the

a rea as “attainment.” The Reading Area remains a designated nonattainment area for the

1997 P M 2.5 NAAQS until the Commonwealth submits, and EPA approves, a R equest for Redesignation and a Maintenance Plan showing the area can maintain the standard for at least 10 years. Nonattainment new source review continues to apply until EPA redesignates the area as attainment (72 FR 20603 ).

Transportation conformity and general conformity also apply; they will continue to apply to the area even after redesignation by EPA as attainment. The Clean Data Determination does not suspend the CAA Sec 172(c)(3) requirement to establish a comprehensive

inventor y for all pollutants considered potential precursors to PM 2 .5 and for direct

emissions of PM 2.5

.

This SIP revision contains the Maintenance Plan for the Reading Area and the 2007

c omprehensive inventory required under Section 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

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 July 29, 2011 (76 FR 45424) with a statutorily required determination under Section 179(c) of the CAA, that the Reading Area attained the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of April 5, 2010. EPA based this determination on complete, quality assured, and certified ambient air monitoring data that show the area monitored attainment for the 2007-2009 monitoring period.- 5

-

the attainment year inventory representing the emissions present during a period the

R eading Area was attaining the PM 2.5 NAAQS

.

To demonstrate maintenance of the PM 2.5 NAAQS for this area, Pennsylvania is showing

that the future emissions of PM 2 .5 and its precursors w ill remain at levels that will provide

for maintenance of the PM 2.5 NAAQS for at least 10 years, taking economic, population and travel growth into account (See, EPA, “Procedures for Processing Requests to

R edesignate Areas to Attainment,” John Calcagni (September 4, 1992) (1992 Calcagni Memo)). This Maintenance Plan contains an attainment year inventory for 2007 and

de monstrates 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 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 continue to decline in the Reading Area. The plan describes emission reduction measures that have been previously adopted; it neither changes existing measures nor adopts

additional measures. The plan indicates how Maintenance Plan progress will be tracked and identifies measures that would be available to promptly correct any NAAQS violation.

S ection 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA requires 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 Request for Redesignation an d th e Maintenance 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, the Request for Redesignation submitted concurrently with this Maintenance Plan indicates that the Reading Area has attained the NAAQS and that attainment was due to permanent and

e nforceable control measures. The Request for Redesignation also demonstrates that the

C ommonwealth has met all of the regulatory and planning requirements under the CAA for

the Rea ding Area that were due before the date of the Request for Redesignation.

In Section 5 of the 1992 Calcagni Memo, EPA recommends the following to ensure

maintena nce of the NAAQS:

 The state should continue to operate an appropriate air quality monitoring network

in orde r to verify the area’s attainment status (addressed in Section IV of this Plan);

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

for 2007 , the mid-year of the three-year monitoring period on which the

S eptember 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 demonstrate maintenance by showing that the future emissions of a poll utant or its precursors will not exceed the level of the attainment inventory over- 6

- at least 10 years following redesignation, taking economic growth into account.

The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP o r Department) has developed 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

thi s Plan and the Request for Redesignation); and

 The 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 shows that the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS will be maintained for at least 10 years after redesignation. The Maintenance Plan shows that emission levels of PM 2.5 and its precursors over the 10 years following redesignation remain at levels that will

pr ovide for maintenance of the PM 2 .5 NAAQS

, even considering growth in population and

vehicle miles traveled.

Th is Maintenance Plan shows that the 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

small er 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 federal heavy-duty diesel emission control programs;

 Federal fuel programs for highway vehicles and nonroad mobile equipment; and

 Federal regulation of offroad diesel and gasoline-powered vehicles and equipment.

Emission reductions from Pennsylvania’s Diesel-Powered Motor Vehicle Idling Act,

Ac t 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, were not relied upon for the demonstration of maintenance. The Outdoor Wood-Fired Boiler regulation was- 7

-

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 Reading Area in maintaining the PM 2.5 NAAQS.

In th is Maintenance Plan, the Department provides assurances that it will continue to

ope rate 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 provides a list of potential contingency measures that it would consider to correct any violation of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation of the area.

Eight years following redesignation, the Commonwealth will submit a revised plan that ensures attainment through 2035.

D. Public Participation

Requirements for a public comment process are set forth in Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA, 40 CFR Section 51.102(d) and 35 P.S. Section 4007.5. The Department provided notice of a public comment period and the opportunity for a hearing on the Maintenance Plan, 2007 comprehensive inventory required by Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA, and the Request to Redesignate the Reading Area to attainment for the 1997 PM 2.5 standard on September 21, 2013. The public comment period closed November 1, 2013. The

De partment scheduled the public hearing to occur on October 30, 2013

, but no persons expressed interest in presenting testimony or attending. Therefore, the Department cancelled the hearing. No one submitted written comments.- 8

- II . EMISSION INVENTORIES

To demonstrate maintenance of the PM 2.5 NAAQS for th e Reading Area, Pennsylvania is showing 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 and travel growth into account. EPA’s Clean Data Determination for the Reading Area was based on 2006-2008 monitoring data. This Maintenance Plan contains

a n attainment year inventory for 2007 and demonstrates that emissions will not be greater

than the attainment 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 are all projected to continue to decline in the Reading Area. This Maintenance Plan also contains a 2002 baseline inventory that represents the emissions present when the Reading Area did not meet the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS. In addition, this SIP revision fulfills the requirement for a comprehensive inventory for the Reading Area under 40 CFR Section 51.1008 to meet the requirements of Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. As

spec ified 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 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.

 “Stationary area sources,” which are industrial, commercial, and residential sources too small or too numerous to be handled individually. These include but are not

li mited to commercial and residential open 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 values are adjusted to remove any double counting.

 “Highway vehicles,” which include passenger cars and light-duty trucks, other trucks, buses and motorcycles.

 “Nonroad sources,” which encompass a diverse collection of engines, in cluding but

not l imited 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

a ircraft.

Pennsylvania and other Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic states participated in a regional

e ffort to refine the emissions inventory and to compile a regional emissions inventory. The Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association (MARAMA) coordinated that

re gional effort, which allowed states to pool their resources to compile a regional- 9

-

emissions inventory for the purpose of conducting the regional modeling analysis used in

P ennsylvania’s air quality management planning efforts to attain the 8-hour ozone NAAQS

and the PM 2.5 NAAQS, and to prepare the regional haze plan.

A. Emissions Inventory Methodology for Baseline Year (2002) and Attainment Year (2007 ) Emissions

Stationary Point Sources. The 2002 and 2007 stationary point source in v entories were 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

I nformation 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 i t. If the owners and operators of facilities provide more accurate emission data based upon other factors, these emission estimates supersede those calculated using SCC codes. Appendix A-1 includes information on stationary point source emission methodology, and Appendix A-2 is the data set for facility 2002 annual emissions. 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 Reading Area in the 2017 and 2025 emission projections.

C ondensable PM is a vapor or gas at stack temperature that condenses to a liquid or solid at stack exit. Condensable emissions from electric generating units (EGUs) were not

re ported uniformly by all facilities. Because of the need to consider the effect of

c ondensable emissions from EGUs on regional haze and fine particles, the 2007 inventory

da ta was augmented, utilizing the condensable emission factors for EGUs developed for

MARAMA in 2008 to calculate condensable PM emissions where that data was missing. [T he 2002 inventory did not include condensable PM for many facilities and was not

a ugmented.] Appendix C-4 contains the technical memorandum describing how the emission factors were developed. The general process is to use the emission factors and heat input to calculate the condensable PM ( PM -CON) emissions, and then to perform the

g ap filling for compounds missing from the facility-reported emissions.

S tationary Area Sources

. Stationary area 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 method similar to that used for stationary point sources. 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 specific to the industry covered.- 10

-

Pennsylvania’s 2002 stationary area source emissions inventory was developed in accordance with EPA guidance 4 and was submitted to the National Emissions Inventory (NEI) to satisfy the requirements of the Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule.

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 emissions 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 updated 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 cycle. 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 adjusted to apply the EPA PM “transport factors” to fugitive dust sources.

More specific information on the procedure used for each industry type is contained in Pennsylvania 2002 Area Source Criteria Air Pollutant Emission Estimation Methods

, (E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., February 2004), which is contained in Appendix B-1. Appendix B-2 co ntains the methodology for the 2007 Pennsylvania area source inventory. Additional methodology information is available in the technical support document for the

2007 re gional inventory which is contained in Appendix C-1. Appendix B-3 is a table

c ontaining stationary area source emissions data for 2002 for the Reading Area. Appendix

B-4 contains the stationary area source emissions data for 2007 , 2017 and 2025 for the Reading Area.

Highway Vehicle Sources. EPA’s MOVES2010 ( Mo tor V ehicle E mission S imulator) is the official model for estimating air pollution emissions from onroad mobile sources including buses, cars, trucks and motorcycles. MOVES2010 replaces MOBILE6.2, the

pr evious mobile source model. Therefore, the Department employed MOVES2010 to estimate the onroad emissions inventory for 2002, 2007, 2017 and 2025.

Additi onal information on highway emission methodology is available in Appendix D. Appe ndix D-1 summarizes the methodology and data inputs used to produce the mobile emissions inventory. Appendix D-2 provides the 2002 base year, 2007 attainment year and 2017 and 2025 projections of mobile (highway) vehicle miles travelled (VMT) and annual

PM 2 .5 direct and precursor emissions. Appendix D-3 describes the model inputs used to generate emission factors for a specific area. Some examples of the inputs described in

4 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.- 11

-

Appendix D-3 are the type and frequency of vehicle emission testing, the fuel types required in the area, temperatures by month, and fleet age. The summary in Appendix D-3 indicates when default information contained in the model is used rather than specific area

information.

Nonroad Sources.

The 2002 Emissions Inventory.

The 2002 emissions for the majority of nonroad emission source categories and pollutants were estimated using the EPA NONROAD 2005 model. The NONROAD model estimates

e missions for diesel, gasoline, liquefied petroleum gas, and compressed natural gas-fueled nonroad equipment types and includes growth factors. The National Mobile Inventory Model (NMIM) was used to estimate emissions of ammonia from sources contained in the NONROAD model. The NONROAD model does not estimate emissions from aircraft, locomotives or commercial marine vessels. Emissions from aircraft, 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 was unavailable. The Reading

Ar ea does not have emissions from commercial marine vessels.

Appendix E-1 is the technical document providing the methodology and description of the procedures used to generate 2002 county-level pollutant emission estimates for nonroad mobile engines included in the EPA’s NONROAD2005 model, locomotive engines, and aircraft operations. The table of 2002 nonroad emissions data sorted by source category is available as Appendix E-2.

Aircraft Emissions in 2002. Emissions from commercial aircraft operations for 2002 were estimated using the EPA-approved Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS) 4.20, the latest version available at the time the inventory was developed. The Department

e stimated emissions using operations data obtained from the United States Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) for commercial aircraft operations and the TAF and the Airnav.com website for military operations. Using this operations data, emissions were modeled directly using the EDMS.

Emissions produced by aircraft at small airports were estimated by using airport operation statistics, which can be found at www.airnav.com and the Federal FAA’s TAF Detailed Report. An emissions factor for a typical general aviation single engine, multi-engine, and jet engine aircraft were derived by averaging the emissions factors from a basket of emission factors for common aircraft of each of the three types of aircraft. Emission factors and operational characteristics contained in EDMS were used. The proportion of

ope rations among the three groups of aircraft was determined by examining the number of each aircraft type based at each airport. For military operations at small airports, the type of aircraft and its emission factors are sometimes identifiable. If not, emission factors calculated to represent an “average” military aircraft are used. Growth was estimated using estimates of future operations found in the FAA TAF Detailed Report.- 12

-

Railroad Emissions. For 2002 locomotive emissions, the Department projected emissions from a 1999 survey when the Department obtained fuel use statistics from Class II and III railroads. For Class I railroads, which produce most of the emissions in the Commonwealth, the Department conducted a 2002 inventory of all railroads that operate in Pennsylvania because the 1999 fuel use data for Class I railroads was skewed by gridlock caused by the acquisition of Conrail by CSX and Norfolk Southern. Both Conrail and Norfolk Southern suffered major gridlock in Pennsylvania and beyond during 1999. Consequently, fuel consumption and air emissions for these two railroads were greatly reduced in 1999. The Department requested and received 2002 fuel usage from thes e railroad companies and developed a 2002 emissions inventory for them. Emissions were generated using EPA emission factors.

The 2007 Emissions Inventory. The 2007 inventory for the majority of nonroad categories was generated using NMIM2008 of which the NONROAD model is a part. The NONROAD model estimates

e missions for diesel, gasoline, 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 aircraft, 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

loca l data was unavailable. NM IM 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

be tter estimates of the emissions from airport ground support equipment. Growth

e stimates for source categories modeled by NMIM are included in the model. The EPA

de fault values were used for most categories.

Aircraft

. For airport emissions, Pennsylvania used the database developed by EPA to support the 2008 NEI, as described in the technical support document for the development of the 2007 inventory in 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

a ssistance of the railroad associations and submitted the inventory to the EPA. The ERTAC inventory was the accepted 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 the Department’s method except in the cases of

some smaller 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, current in-use- 13

-

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 (gallons /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.

B. Baseline Year (2002 ) Emissions

An emission inventory is an estimate of the emissions from sources in a particular area. The Department developed an emission inventory for 2002 in accordance with EPA

g uidance. 5 The 2002 emissions inventory represents the emissions present when the Reading Area did not meet the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS

. The 2002 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: stationary point sources, stationary area sources, highway vehicle

sourc es and nonroad sources. The 2002 inventory is not directly comparable to the 2007, 2017 and 2025 inventories because of changes in inventory methodology and the adjustment made to account for condensable PM emissions from EGUs in the 2007, 2017

and 2025 emission inventories. Table II -1 summarizes the emissions for 2002.

Table II-1: Reading Area 2002 Annual Emissions (Tons per Year)

Reading 2002 PM 2.5 PM 10 SO 2 NO X VOC NH 3 Stationary Point Sources 577 1,265 14,834 5,363 1,740 9

Area Sources 2,608 14,299 2,131 1,502 8,819 4,284
Highway Vehicle Sources 459 530 306 14,922 5,237 180

Non

- Road Sources 212 221 242 3,323 2,331 2

Totals 3,857 16,315 17,514 25,110 18, 128 4,475

C. Attainment Year (2007) Annual Emissions (Tons per Year)

An emissions inventory of 2007 emissions of PM 10 , PM 2.5 , SO 2 , NO X , VOC, and NH 3 for the Reading Area identifies PM and PM precursor emissions during the period when the

R eading Area d emonstrated it attained the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS

. Table II-2 summarizes the

emissions for 2007. While, as noted above, the 2002 emissions inventory is not directly

c omparable to the 2007, 2017 and 2025 inventories due to changes in inventory methodology and the adjustment made to account for condensable PM emissions from EGUs in the 2007, 2017 and 2025 emission inventories, PM 2.5 emissions decreased by 4%,

SO 2 emissions increased

by 1%, and NO X emissions decreased by 20 % from 2002 to 2007.

5 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.- 14

- Table II-2: Reading Area 2007 Annual Emissions (Tons per Year)

Reading 2007 PM 2.5 PM 10 SO 2 NO X VOC NH 3 Stationary Point Sources 1,272 1,922 15,140 5,793 1,237 21

Area Sources 1,859 5,330 2,389 1,289 5,877 3,632
Highway Vehicle Sources 383 452 81 11,374 4,415 163

Non

- R oad Sources 191 205 106 2,532 2,096 2

Totals 3,704 7,908 17,716 20,988 13,625 3,818

Sulfur dioxide emissions in 2007 were 202 tons (1%) more than they were in 2002. The

SO 2 emissions from stationary point sources and area sources increased while the SO 2 emissions from highway vehicle and non-road sources decreased in the Reading Area. The

small increase in SO 2 emissions from stationary point sources and area sources can be attributed to typical year- to -year fluctuation in emissions and is not considered significant by the Department.

The emissions inventory shows an apparent increase in PM 2 .5 emissions from stationary sources from 2002 to 2007, 2017, and 2025, in part, because the 2002 inventory was based

on e missions reported to the Department by th e owners and operators of the facilities. The reports did not include condensable PM for many facilities. The 2007 EGU inventory was

a ugmented utilizing condensable PM emission factors for EGUs developed for MARAMA

in 2008 to calculate condensable PM emissions where that data was missing. The projected 2017 and 2025 PM 2.5 emissions for EGUs also include condensable PM emissions because they were projected from the 2007 inventory.

D. Growth Projection Methodologies for 2017 and 2025

This section describes the data, methods, and assumptions utilized in developing estimates

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 missions invent ory. Appendix C-3 contains the technical support document for the development of the 2025 emissions inventory. The documents prov ide details on the specific factors, control assumptions, and implementation schedules used in the emission projection calculations 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 Union and Virginia (MANE-VU+VA).

Significant infrastructure development to extract natural gas from the Marcellus Shale formation in some Pennsylvania counties has occurred. Point and area source emissions result from the placement of drilling equipment, gathering lines and compressor stations. The Reading Area has not experienced any Marcellus Shale development and is not

e xpected to experience any of this development in the future.- 15

-

EGUs. Annual 2007 EGU point emissions were grown to 2017 and 2025 using growth factors based on AEO2011 Table 96 - Electricity Generation by Electricity Market Module

R egion and Fuel Source. The appropriate AEO2011 growth factor was applied to the 2007

e missions to calculate a “growth only” emission value for 2025. Post-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 emissions inventory in Appendix C-3.

The Department’s future year projection inventories for the EGU sector are conservative.

I n February 2012, GenOn Energy announced plans to shut down Titus Generating Station

in 2015. The Titus Generating Station is a coal-fired generating station located near

B irdsboro, Pennsylvania in the Reading Area. Reductions from the planned shutdown are not included in the future year inventories and are, therefore, surplus to the emission

re duction estimates.

Non-EGU Point Sources and Stationary Area Sources. For non-EGU point sources and

statio nary area sources, the emission projections for the 2017 and 2025 were based on

Ve rsion 3.3 of the 2007 MANE-VU+VA inventory, which was adjusted to apply the EPA PM “transport factors” 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

inventor ies contained in Appendix C-2 and Appendix C-3, respectively. These documents

we re 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 results for

emission forecasts.

NonEGU point source and stationary area source growth factors were developed using:

 Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) fuel consumption forecasts;

 State-level employment projections by NAICS code; and

 Other state-specific emission projection data.

Generally, AEO projection factors were used for fuel consumption sources and

e mployment data for other source categories. The U.S. Energy Information

Admini stration (EIA) publishes the AEO annually. The AEO contains long-term projections of energy supply, demand and prices. AEO2010 fuel-use 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, the AEO2010 fuel-use forecasts were used for all

re sidential, commercial and industrial sector fuel use, except for industrial natural gas usage, where AEO2011 projections were used.- 16

-

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, even before the application of control assumptions. Because of the possibility that facilities could apply 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 factors.

As discussed previously, because the 2002 stationary point source inventory was based on emissions reported to the Department by facilities and did not include condensable PM for many facilities, the emissions inventory shows an apparent increase of direct PM 2 .5 emissions from stationary point sources in 2007, 2017 and 2025 compared with 2002.

Hi ghway Vehicle Sources. The EPA’s approved highway vehicle emission model, MOVES2010, projects highway vehicle average fleet emission factors. State specific

infor mation 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 methodolog y 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 MOVES2010 for Emissions

Inv entory Preparation in State Implementation Plans and Transportation Conformity

. Appe ndices D-1 through D-3 of this Maintenance Plan include specific information on

the highway emissions inventory methodology, data files of emissions estimates and MOVES input paramete rs

.

As shown in Table II -3

, VMT for the future analysis year increases 39% from 3.34 billion

VMT in 2007 to 4.65 billion VMT in 2025 within the nonattainment area. Despite the

g rowth in VMT, emissions of the most significant vehicle-related precursor, NO X , are significantly lower in the future analysis 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, Section III -B relating to motor vehicle emission budgets for transportation conformity.- 17

-

Table II -3 : Reading Area VMT (Miles) and Vehicle Emissions (Tons per Year)

Year VMT PM 2.5 PM 10 SO 2 NO X VOC NH 3 2002 3,145,640,748 459 530 306 14,922 5,237 180

2007 3,341,374,032 383 452 81 11,374 4,415 163

2017 3,962,853, 705 174 246 29 5,218 2,386 118

2025 4,651,851,845 127 214 32 3,381 1,501 116

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 emissions 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

a pproximately 3300 individual airports. Actual LTOs are reported for 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 the AEO2010 growth projections published in May 2010. There are separate projections for passenger rail and freight rail energy use. Passenger rail data from AEO2010 Table A-7

wa s used to calculate the growth factor for 2007-2017 and 2007 -20 25. 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/I II line haul, and yard switch locomotives were used.

Additional information about nonroad emission projection methodologies can also be found in Appendi ces C-2 and C-3, the technical support documents for the development of the 2017 and 2025 inventories, respectively. The table of nonroad emissions data sorted by source category is available as Appendix E-3.

E. Interim Year (2017) Emissions

Ta ble II -4 summarizes the emissions expected in 2017. These emissions take activity and

e missions growth and/or controls fro m 2007 in to account. Appendix C, relating to the- 18

-

regional emissions inventory and projection methodology, contains the technical support documents that describe the methodologies used to project the 2007 emissions to 2017.

Table II-4 : Reading Area Projected 2017 Emissions (Tons per Year)

Reading 2017 PM 2.5 PM 10 SO 2 NO X VOC NH 3 Stationary Point Sources 1,186 1,828 13,604 4,114 1,267 32

Area Sources 1,798 5,363 1,930 1,141 5,751 3,966
Highway Vehicle Sources* 200 246 29 5,739 2,386 118

Non

- Road Sources 119 129 3 1,391 1,263 2

Emission Reduction Credits 4 25 0 0 30 0

Totals 3,307 7,591 15,567 12,386 10,697 4,119
*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-4 reflect inclusion of that safety margin.

F. Maintenance Year (2025) Emissions

T able II-5 su mmarizes 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.

T able II-5: Reading Area Projected 2025 Emissions (Tons per Year)

Reading 2025 PM 2.5 PM 10 SO 2 NO X VOC NH 3
S tationary Point Sources 1,251 1,905 14,650 4,350 1,283 28

Area Sources 1,727 5,397 1,223 1,114 5,753 4,221
Highway Vehicle Sources* 146 214 32 3,719 1,501 116

Non

- Road Sources 87 96 3 1,003 1,125 3

Emission Reduction Credits 4 25 0 0 30 0

Totals 3,215 7,636 15,908 10,186 9,692 4,368
*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.

G. Maintenance Plan Emissions Test

To demonstrate maintenance of the PM 2.5 NAAQS for this area, Pennsylvania must show

that the future emissions of PM 2.5 and its precursors will not exceed the level of the 2007- 19

-

attainment year inventory for at least 10 years, taking economic, population and travel growth into account.

While EPA established presumptions related to PM 2.5 precursors in the PM 2.5 implementation rule, Pennsylvania recognizes the court decision in Natural 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 PM 2 .5 nonattainment areas under Subpart 4, pointing specifically to section 189(e), which applies

to contr ol 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 CA A

S ection 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 significantly 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. Pennsylvania assessed

emissions of NH 3 , although there are no major stationary sources of NH 3 in the Reading

Area.

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. The small projected increase in NH 3

e missions 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 Reading Area.

Emi ssions of PM 2.5 decrease from 2007 to 2025 by 508 tons (14%). Emissions of SO 2 , NO X and VOC also decrease from 2007 to 2025 by 1808 tons (10%), 11,140 tons (53%), and 3933 tons (29%), respectively. Over the same time period, emissions of NH 3 are projected to increase 550 tons (14%). The increase in NH 3 emissions is due to anticipated growth reflected by activity factors (such as population 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 NAAQS in the Reading Area 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 area. In

a ddition, the Reading Area currently has an annual design value based on 2010-2012

moni toring data of 10.9 μg/m 3 , which is significantly lower than the 1997 NAAQS of 15

μ g/m3.- 20

- Table II-6: Reading Area Maintenance Emissions Test

Reading PM 2.5 SO 2 NO X VOC NH3

2007 3,704 17,716 20,988 13,625 3,818

2017* 3,307 15,567 12,386 10,697 4,119

2025* 3,215 15,908 10,186 9,692 4,368
*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 emissions in Table II-6 reflect inclusion of that safety margin.

I II . PERMANENT AND ENFORCEABLE CONTROL MEASURES

A. Permanent and Enforceable Control Measures

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 implementation rule, the EPA established general presumptive policies for assessing which PM 2.5 precursors should be evaluated for possible controls. In the implementation rule, the EPA required states to evaluate control measures

for SO 2 and primary PM 2.5 in all locations. The EPA required 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 do not significantly contribute to PM 2.5 concentrations in the nonattainment area. The EPA required 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 th e 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 decision, the court granted petitions for review that challenged EPA’s implementation rule. After considering the petitions and EPA’s response to them,

the c ourt remanded the case to EPA to re-promulgate the rule pursuant to Subpart 4 of Part D of the Clean Air Act, rather than implementin g 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 remains in effect unless and until EPA rescinds it or

pr omulgates a replacement. In any event, this maintenance plan demonstrates maintenance of the standard consistent with the court’s ruling.

In general, the court’s decision could affect an area’s nonattainment 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 Reading Area is already attaining the NAAQS, however, those considerations are not relevant for this maintenance plan. The court noted 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- 21

-

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

statio nary 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; 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.

P ennsylvania assessed emissions of NH 3 although there are no major stationary sources of

NH 3 in the Reading Area.

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 summ ary of the quantity of emission reductions expected from 2007 to 2025 is included

in Ta ble III -1 (Negative values 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 Reading Area are anticipated to be

lowe r 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 in the

nona ttainment area. Each control measure is explained in greater detail in the following

se ctions. Ammonia emissions, as discussed in Section II-G relating to the maintenance emissions test, are anticipated to increase from 2007 to 2025, but the increase does not

present a concern for maintaining the NAAQS in the Reading Area because the NH 3

e missions overall are small compared with the SO 2 , NO X and VOC emissions, which are all projected to decline in the area.

T able III-1: Summary of Emission Reductions (Tons) from 2007 to 2025

f rom Control Measures

2007 to 2025 Difference PM 2.5 SO 2 NO X VOC NH 3 Stationary Point Sources

- 16

- 490

- 1,443 76 7

Area Sources

- 132

- 1,166

- 175

- 124 588 Highway Vehicle

Sources*

- 237

- 49

- 7,656

- 2,913

- 47

Nonroad Sources

- 104

- 103

- 1,529

- 971 1

TOTAL

- 489

- 1,808

- 10,802

- 3,933 549
*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 III-1 reflect inclusion of that safety margin.- 22

-

Pursuant to 40 CFR Part 51, Subpart K (relating to source surveillance), 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:

 Emissions reports and recordkeeping for stationary sources;

 Periodic testing and inspection of stationary sources;

 Enforcement and complaint investigation of visible emission limitations;

 Enforceable test methods for emission limits; and

 Continuous emission monitoring for stationary sources.

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 maintaining 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

De partment’s permitting program 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) contain 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 demonstration, 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 also monitors

the status of

compliance by conducting complaint investigations. The Department does visible emission inspections at regulated facilities and reports the results to the EPA AF S system as required under the Department’s grant. The Department conducts inspections of

a ir contamination sources in accordance with the Compliance Monitoring Schedule which is approved by EPA.

1. Stationary Point Sources

Background. 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

c ommence May 1, 2003. The regulations were approved by EPA as a revision to the

C ommonwealth’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 plants and internal combustion engines, with emission reductions to commence

Ma y 1, 2005. These regulations were approved by EPA as a SIP revision on September 29, 2006 (71 FR 57428).- 23

-

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

be ing implemented in Pennsylvania 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,

P ennsylvania terminated the NO X Budget Trading Program and transitioned to the federal CAIR for large electric 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 othe r 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, and

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 remand, EPA replaced CAIR with the 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, EM E 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 SIP revision also

established emission limits for the non-EGUs and other units that were subject to the

C ommonwealth’s NO X Budget Trading Program but are not subject to the CAIR NO X Oz one Season Trading Program. Th ese units must continue monitoring NO X emissions and must meet an emissions cap. Each unit has an allowable emission rate, calculated by

J anuary 31 of each year, based on the previous ozone season’s heat input. If the combined

NO X o zone season emissions from all of the se units exceed the statewide ozone season

e mission cap of 3,438 tons, each unit that exceeds 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

a llowable 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 section 145.4(b) 3. The balance of tons remaining in the

se t aside is available to the Department annually for accounting corrections. The Commonwealth retires any unused amount from this set aside each year.- 24

-

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

we re 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 as

a SIP revision on December 10, 2009, and codified at 40 CFR §52.2020(c)(1).

Cement kilns and large stationary internal combustion engines. The CAIR SIP revision also included regulations updating the the cement manufacturing and large

statio nary 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

we re subject to the NO X SIP Call were required to surrender NO X SIP Call allowances if they exceed ed 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 season allowances, the

De partment modified the regulations to require surrender of CAIR NO X ozone season and

C AIR NO X annual allowance s for emission limit exceedances.

The Department’s regulations for large stationary internal combustion engines and cement

kil ns, codified in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 145, Subchapters B and C, respectively, were

a pproved by EPA as a SIP revision on December 10, 2009, and codified at 40 CFR § 51.2020(c)(1). An amendment to the Department’s regulation for cement kilns

to re duce NO X emissions effective April 15, 2011, codified in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 145, Subchapter C, was subsequently approved by EPA as as SIP revision on July 19, 2011, and codified at 40 CFR §51.2020(c)(1).

Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD). The PSD program is a preconstruction 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 in areas attaining the NAAQS. 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). The federal PSD regulations codifie d in 40 CFR Part 52 are incorporated by reference in their entirety in 25 Pa. Code § 127.83 (relating to adoption by reference). The PSD program requires any new source to implement Best Available Control Technology (BACT) and limits a new source's allowa ble impact on the

environment.

Best Available Technology (BAT) Program. Pennsylvania regulations require, in

25 Pa. Code § 127.1, that new sources in Pennsylvania must control the emission of air pollutants to the maximum extent, consistent with the bes t 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 §127.12(a)(5), an application for a plan approval must show

that the emissions from a new source will be the minim um attainable through the use of the best available technology. Pennsylvania regulations define “best available technology” in

25 Pa. Code § 121.1 as, “Equipment, devices, methods or techniques as determined by the- 25

-

Department which will prevent, reduce or control emissions of air contaminants to the

max imum 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

a pproved by EPA on July 30, 1996, and codified in the SIP at 40 CFR §52.2020(c)(1).

The following federally enforceable programs, already incorporated in the

C ommonwealth’s SIP, will also reduce emissions.

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

re gulations that are applicable to sources in Pennsylvania. These MACT standards are adopted and incorporated by reference in Section 6.6 of Pennsylvania’s Air Pollution

C ontrol 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 enfo rceable permits issued by the De partment for affected sources.

2

. Highway Vehicle Sources

Even with increases in VMT that 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 vehicle miles traveled. These

de creases can be attributed to the programs described below.

F ederal 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 by the CAA Amendments of 1990 include NO X and VOC limits for light-duty gasoline vehicles (LDGVs) and light-duty gasoline trucks (LDGTs). The phase in of these standards began in 1994. Evaporative VOC emissions were reduced in g asoline-powered cars starting with Model Y ear (MY) 1998.

I n 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 identical to the low emission standards adopted by California. The 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 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 Sections 126.401-126.441, in addition to including the Clean Vehicles- 26

-

Program, allowed automobile manufacturers to comply with NLEV instead of the CA LEV

pr ogram through MY 2005. These regulations affected vehicles 6,000 pounds and less and were the regulations in effect for new motor vehicles in the baseline year, 2002.

In 1999, the EPA promulgated regulations more stringent than NLEV (Tier 2), starting

with M Y 2004 (65 FR 6698 ; Feb.10, 2000)

. T he NLEV program was replaced for MY 2004 and later by the more stringent Tier 2 regulations, and vehicle manufacturers operating under the NLEV program became subje ct to the Tie r 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 Vehicle 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 Vehicle Program as a revision to the Commonwealth’s SIP on January 24, 2012 (77 F R 3386).

Heavy-Duty Diesel Control Programs. The EPA promulgated more stringent national regulations for heavy-duty engines and vehicles (over 14,000 pounds) starting with

MY 2004. 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 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

pr ovided in the MOVES model.

I n 2002, the Department adopted the Heavy-Duty Diesel Emissions Control Program for model years starting after May 2004. The program incorporates 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 expiration 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 e ngines 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 diesel engines, the standards were phased in from 2007 to

2010 f or 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 adopted requirements for idling restriction engine programming and an option al “clean NO X idle” standard. However, there is no EPAa pproved methodology to estimate emission reductions from this requirement. Therefore,

the e mission estimates use assumptions of the federal rule for MY 2007 through 2010.- 27

-

Because the new engine standards are adversely affected by sulfur in fuel, the EPA also

re quired most highway diesel fuel to contain no more than 15 parts per million (ppm) of sulfur, beginning in the fall of 2006. There wa s 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 used 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 Reading 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 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 emissions program as a SIP revision on December 1, 2003. EPA approved the SIP revision on October 6, 2005 (70 FR 58313 ).

Low Su lfur 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 contributes to air pollution. By removing most sulfur from gasolin e, 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 content 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 MY 2004. Vehicles meeting Tier 2 emission standards are 77 to 95 percent cleaner than earlier models.

C urrently, EPA has proposed a rulemaking reducing sulfur limits in gasoline further with a Tier 3 Low Sulfur Gasoline program. (78 FR 29816 ; May 21, 2013). The Tier 3 program would reduce sulfur levels in gasoline to 10 parts per million or lower. When

im plemented, this program, by 2030, would increase the effectiveness of vehicle emission controls even further and reduce tailpipe emissions of NO X by 29 percent and VOC by 26

percent.

3

. Nonroad Sources

The EPA has adopted a series of regulations affecting new diesel-powered (“compression ig nition”) 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 at www.epa.gov/nonroad. The Department used the- 28

-

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 sulfur content of diesel used in nonroad diesel engines. The

re duction in fuel sulfur content prevents 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 fuel, 15 ppm; this requirement began applying in 2012 to locomotive and marine diesel fuel. EPA ado pted 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 changes to the nonroad diesel fuel program to allow for the production and sale of diesel fuel with up to 1000 ppm sulfur for use in Category 3 marine vessels. This requirement does not impact the Reading Area because the Reading Ar ea 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 Pe nnsylv ania

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 lower sulfur content limits will be

re quired beginning July 1, 2016. The Department estimates statewide SO 2 emission reductions of approximately 25,000 tons per year from this rule.

Cons umer Products. This regulation applies statewide to any person who sells, supplies, offers for sale, or manufactures certain consumer 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). Additional regulations were adopted on

Oc tober 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 Pennsylvania Bulletin on December 25, 2010 (40 Pa. B. 7340), an d approved by EPA as a SIP revision on September 26, 2012 (77 FR 59090).- 29

-

B. Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for Transportation Conformity

Section 176 of the CAA provides a mechanism by which federally 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 conformity 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 transportation conformity determinations. The responsible agency in the Reading Area is the Reading Area Transportation Study, the

de signated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) under federal transportation planning requirements.

In this Maintenance 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

y ear 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 regulations to address the

1997 PM 2.5 standard were published in the Fe deral Register on May 6, 2005 (70 FR 24280), to account for PM 2.5 and its precursors. 6 The implementation rule did not amend these regulations. Section 93.102 requires conformity determinations to be

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

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

This SIP revision establishes motor vehicle emission budgets for PM 2 .5 and NO X

. The information in Table III-2, once the EPA approves it for purposes of conformity, will

e stablish transportation conformity budgets for the Reading Area. For informational

purpo ses, DEP analyzed the projected 2025 inventory and found that highway emissions of

VOC

, NH 3 , and SO 2 account for 14.36 %, 2.67 %, and 0.20 % of the total projected 2025 inventory, respectively, as shown in Table III-3.

6 The regulations were again amended on March 14, 2012 (77 CFR 14979) to restructure several sections so that they apply to any new or revised NAAQS and make several clarifications to improve implementation.- 30

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

Reading PM 2.5 NO X
2007 383 11,374

2017 Predicted 174 5,218
Safety Margin 26 522

2017 Budget 200 5,739

2025 Predicted 127 3,381
Safety Margin 19 338

2025 Budget 146 3,719

Table III-3 shows that the amount of emission reductions anticipated between 2007 and 2017 and between 2007 and 2025 easily accommodates the safety margins granted.

Table III-3 Comparison of Safety Margin to Total Anticipated Emission Reductions

in 2017 and 2025

Berks PM 2.5 NOx

2007 3,704 20,988

2017 3,307 11,864

2025 3,196 9,848

2007

- 2017 397 9,124

Margi n Granted 26 522

2007

- 2025 508 11,140

Margin Granted 19 338- 31

-

Table III-4: Comparison of 2025 On -Road Mobile VOC, NH 3 , and SO 2 Emissions to the Total Projected 2025 Inventory

Reading VOC NH 3 SO 2

On

- Road Mobile Source 2025 Inventory (Tons) 1,501 116 32

Total 2025 Inventory (Tons) 9,692 4,368 15,908

Percent of Total 2025 Inventory (%) 15.49 2.67 0.20

The motor vehicle emission budgets include PM from vehicle exhaust, 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

inventor y, not in the motor vehicle emission budgets. Appendices B-3 and B-4, relating to area source annual emissions, contain estimates of the PM 2.5 emissions attributable to paved and unpaved roads.

The Reading monitoring site includes a monitor that measures PM 2 .5 mass and a speciation

monitor that collects data on the chemical constituents of PM 2.5 in the Reading Area. Transportation construction-related fugitive dust emissions are not a significant contributor

to the PM 2.5 concentrations observed at the Reading monitor. At the Reading monitor, the

c rustal 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

tra nsportation construction-related fugitive emissions are insignificant.- 32

- Figure 1: Pie Chart of 2007 Reading Speciation Data- 33

- IV. AMBIENT AIR QUALITY MONITORING NETWORK

The Commonwealth will continue to operate the air monitoring network in accordance with 40 CFR Part 58 to verify the attainment status of the area, with no reductions in the number of sites from those in the existing network unless pre-approved by EPA. The Commonwealth has concurrently submitted a request for redesignation of the Reading

A rea that contains analysis of ambient air quality data and related factors.

V. VERIFICATION OF CONTINUED ATTAINMENT

The Commonwealth will track the attainment status of the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS in the area by reviewing air quality and emissions data during the maintenance period. The

C ommonwealth will perform an annual evaluation of two key factors, VMT data 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 Emission Reporting

R equirements (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.

VI. CONTINGENCY MEASURES

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 μg/m 3 in a single calendar year within the maintenance area or if the periodic

e missions inventory for the Reading Area exceeds the attainment year inventory (2007) by more than 10 percent. The first level response will consist of a study to determine whether

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 evaluate whether the trend is likely to continue and, if so, the necessary and appropriate control measures to

re verse the trend. Implementation of necessary and appropriate controls would take place as expeditiously as possible.

A second level response will be prompted if the 2-year average of the annual mean PM 2 .5 concentrations exceeds 15.0 μg/m 3 within the maintenance area. If this trigger point occurs, the Commonwealth will evaluate whether additional emission control measures

shoul d be implemented in order to prevent a violation of the air quality standard. The Department will analyze 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 adopting any selected measures that are- 34

-

necessary and appropriate so that in the event of a violation, the measures can be

im plemented as expeditiously as practicable.

If a violation of the NAAQS occurs, the Commonwealth will propose and adopt additional emission reduction measures, as necessary and appropriate, as expeditiously as practicable

in ac cordance with the implementation 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 re turn the area to attainment with the standard.

Additi onal emission reduction measures to be considered for adoption if a violation of the

NA AQS occurs in the Reading Area would be based on criteria including the following:

 Air quality analysis indicating nature of violation [cause, location, 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

 Co sts, equity and cost-effectiveness.

Additional emission reduction measures the Department would consider pursuing for

pr omulgation if a violation of the NAAQS occurs in the Reading Area include the following:

Regulatory measures:

 A regulation based on 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 based 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 technology for Class 2 yard locomotives; and

o Idling reduction technologies or strategies for truck stops, warehouses and other freight-handling facilities.

 Promotion of accelerated turnover of lawn and garden equipment, especially commercial equipment.

 Additional promotion of alternative fuels for fleets, home heating and agricultural

use.- 35

-

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 Council and other advisory committees, 7 as appropriate.

Within 5 months: Environmental Quality Board (EQB) meeting/action.

Within 7 months: Publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin for comment as proposed rulemaking.

Within 9 months: Public hearing takes place and comment period on proposed rule

closes.

Within 10 months : Independent Regulatory Review Commission (IRRC) comment on proposed rule.

Within 12 months: AQTAC, Citizens Advisory Council and other advisory committees, as appropriate, review responses to co mme nts and dr aft final rulemaking.

Within 15 months: EQB meeting/action.

Within 16 months: IRRC action on final rulemaking.

Within 17 months: Attorney General review/action.

W ithin 18 months: Publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin as final rulemaking and

submission to the EPA as a SIP revision. The regulation would become

e ffective upon publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin

.

7 Other committees could include the Small Business Compliance Advisory Committee and Agriculture Advisory Committee.- 36

- ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AEO Annual Energy Outlook AQTAC 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)

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

E PA The United States 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 Retrieval 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 Vehicles

L DGT Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 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 Model 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)- 37

-

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 less than 2.5 microns in diameter or Fine Particulates

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 Sulfur Dioxide

TAF Terminal Area Forecast TCM Transportation Control Measures TSD Technical Support Document

μ g/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

# NOTICES

Proposed Revision to the State Implementation Plan for the Reading Fine Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area; Public Hearing

[43 Pa.B. 6064] [Saturday, October 12, 2013]

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. Air quality in the Reading PM 2.5 Nonattainment Area, consisting of Berks County, has improved and now meets the 1997 PM 2.5 health-based standards. Therefore, the

De partment of Environmental Protection (Department) plans to submit a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to redesignate this area to attainment.

The Department published notice at 43 Pa.B. 5661 (September 21, 2013) of a public comment period and public hearing on the request and on a proposed State Implementation Plan revision containing the 2007 comprehensive inventory and a maintenance plan demonstrating that the area can maintain the standard for the next 10 years as required under section 175A(a) of the Federal Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.A. § 7505a(a)). The notice explained that the maintenance plan will also establish new motor vehicle emission budgets for purposes of transportation conformity, upon EPA approval.

The Department is postponing the public hearing by 1 week and extending the public comment period. Public notice of the new public hearing date and extension of the public comment period has been provided by local newspaper advertisement in the affected area.

The Department will hold a public hearing to receive comments on the proposal on Wednesday, October 30, 2013, at 11 a.m. at the Department's Reading District Office, 1005 Crossroads Boulevard, Reading, PA 19605. Persons wishing to present testimony at the hearin g should contact Alex Haas, P. O. Box 8468, Harrisburg, PA 17105, (717) 787-9495, alehaas@pa.gov to reserve a time. Witnesses should keep testimony to 10 minutes and should provide two written copies of their statement at the hearing.

If by October 28, 2013, no person has expressed an interest in testifying at the hearing, the hearing will be cancelled. The Department will notify the public 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.htm.Persons may also contact the Department to find out if the hearing is cancelled by contacting

Alex Haas at (717) 787-9495 or alehaas@pa.gov.

The request to redesignate the area to attainment and the proposed State Implementation Plan

rev ision are available on the Department's web site at www.depweb.state.pa.us (choose ''Air,'' choose ''Bureau of Air Quality,'' choose ''Regs/Plans,'' choose ''Clean Air Plans'') or through the contact persons listed as follows.

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 (717) 787- 9495 or alehaas@pa.gov. 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 November 1, 2013. Written comments should be sent to the attention of Nancy Herb, Bureau of Air Quality, P. O. Box 8468, Harrisburg, PA 17105 -8468, nherb@pa.gov. Use ''Reading PM 2.5 Redesignation'' as the subject

line in written communication.

E. CHRISTOPHER ABRUZZO, Acting Secretary

[Pa.B. Doc. No. 13-1905. Filed for public inspection October 11, 2013, 9:00 a.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.

webmaster@PaBulletin.comCOMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

ST0-521 REV. 06-2010 INVOICE NO.
PUBLICATIONS AUTHORIZATION AND INVOICE

PUBLICATIONS AUTHORIZATION (To be completed by agency):

TO:**(~AND** ADDFt£SS Of: NEWSPAPEA.\ Reading Eagle

Attn: Legal Ads

PO Box 5B2 Readinq, PA 19603-0SB2 

### n i FEDERAL I,D. NO.iSOC. SEC. NO. 

### i 24"0676050 '._'M'_""M

.. "_M." •• " .• ·M"M

.... M"

___ M_ .•.

__ .... _. ___**,~** .... "_" FROM: (NAME AND ADDRESS OF AGENCY) AGENCY 

# I

TELEPHONE NO. Alex Haas 717-787-9495

PA DEP- BAQ

400 Market 5t

H;ur\c;hllrn PA**1710~** D

HEREWITH IS ENCLOSED coPY FOR PUBLICATION OF ADVERTISEMENT FOR PROPOSALS TO 

### IlYPE OF AD 

## o EMPLOY 

### 0 PURCHASE 

### 0 CONTRACT 

### 0 SELL 

### 0 CLAssiFIED 

### IZJ LEGAL NOTICE

PUBLISH ADVERTISEMENT (No. OF TIMES) jMAXlMUM NO. OF LINES DATE '. 

# I

ORDER NO.

lx Only September 25, 2013

DATES OF INSERTION SIGNATUl'o:"'}ORAGENCY (:" J 

### I (}J 

### fi

On or Before September 30, 2013**JL.Zd~,,· C.~**  L/O---1..L 

### L\:Z--t".#t-<,t-t--

.......... You. as vendor, are authorized to publish this advertisement in your newspaper, subject to the tenms 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 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 %

INVOICE (To be completed by publisher)'

DATE OF INSERTION ACTUAl NO. OF PRINTED LINES COST PER LINE TOTAL AMOUNT

1stAd 9/30/13 209 1. 65 344. 5

2nd Ad

3rd Ad Affidavit Char e 5. 0

? 

## ",

GRAND TOTAL

### ~ $351. 5

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Counlyof Berks

Before me, the subscriber, a Notary Public in and for said County, personally came

__ ....!L"y"n"'n!.....;S"'c"'h"'l,,· t"'t"l"e"r"-

____ _ who being duly sworn, doth depose and say that he is' .,.."-,'A",s,:,s",l,,,·**s"-t"'a"'n"'t~"'S-"e"'c-7r-=e-=t-=a-=r.Ly** _____________ _ the Reading Eagle a general newspaper published at -::--:-.:oR"'e"'a"'d"'i"'n"g'---:--_-:--::---:--_-,-

__ -:----:-:-

__ _ that the advertisement, of which learsheet is attached herelo, was published in the regular advertising columns of said newspapl

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,

Sworn a**dayof-,~~~~Lk~~Fr~~** __ 

### -r

My commission expires COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYlVANIA

NOTARIAL SEAL

. *This affidavit must be made by the**wne'>.Ii~!:ii.sl!ll'>r9.~r~Sffillljill<iSlliUll!:"t** of he owner or publrsher.

C!TY OF READING, BERKS COUNTY

MY COMMISSION EXPIRES OCT. 2, 2016

## Rec;o!:"j [':)1<-



## P<.obJ:sheoi M 0,., 

## "'">" Seph""ber 3D, 

### Z-OJJ

Proposed Revision

to the State Implementation Plan for the Reading Fine

Particulate Matter Nonatlainment Area;
Public Hearing

Particulate matter (PM)
includes both solid and liquid particles suspended in the air, Fine partide pollution describes particulate matter that is less than or equal to 2.5
micrometers in diameter (PM2.5), PM2.S concentrations above the federal health-based standard

pose a serious human
health threat, Air quality in the Reading PM2.5 Nonattainment Area, (onsfsting of Berks County in Pennsylvania, has improved and now meets the 1997 PM2.S healthbased standards. Therefore, the Department of
Environmental Protection (Department) plans

to submit a request to the Us. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

to redesignate this area
to attainment.

The Department is seeking public comment on this request and on a proposed State Implementation Plan revision containing the 2007 comprehensive inventory and a maintenance plan**demonstra~ing** .that the area can malntarn
the standard for the

next 10 years as required under section 175A{a) of
the federal Clean Air Act (42 U.s.C.A § 7505a). Upon EPA approval,**~he** maintenance plan will
also establish new motor vehicle emission budgets for purposes of transportation conformity.

The request to redesignate the area to attainment and the proposed State Implementation Plan revision are available on the Department's website at www.depweb.state.pa.u

s (choose" Air,

n choose
"Bureau of Air Quality, " choose "Regs/Plans,

n choose "Clean Air Plans")

or through the contact

persons listed below. The Department will hold. a public hearing to receIve comments on the proposal on Wednesday, October 30, 2013, at 11 :00 a.m., at the Department's Reading District Office, 1005 Crossroads Boulevard, Reading, PA 19605. Persons wishing to present testimony at the hearing should contact Alex Haas, P.O. Box 8468, Harrisburg, PA 17105, (717) 787-9495 Or alehaas@pa.govto re-

serve a time. Witnesses should keep testimony

to ten minutes and should pr'ovide'two writ-

ten copies of their state-

ment at the hearing.

If by October 28, 2013,

no person has expressed

an interest in testifying

at the hearing, the hearing will be cancelled.
The Department will no- tify the public if the hearing is cancelled on the Bureau of Air QuaHwebpage:

Persons may also contact the Department to find

out if the hearing is can- celfed by contacting Alex
Haas: at (717) 787-9495

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 prO' ceeding should contact Alex Haas at (717)**787~** 9495 or alehaas@pa.gov.
TDD users may contact the AT&T Relay Service

at (800) 654-5984 to dis-

cuss how the Depart-

ment can best accommo- date their needs.

The Department must receive comments no lat-

er than November 1, 2013. 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.gov.
Use "Reading PM2.5 Redesignation" as the subject line in written communication.

CHRISTOPHER E. ABRUZZO, Acting Secretary

# NOTICES

Proposed Revision to the State Implementation Plan for the Reading Fine Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area; Public Hearing

[43 Pa.B. 5661] [Saturday, September 21, 2013]

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. Air quality in the Reading PM 2.5 Nonattainment Area, consisting of Berks County, has improved and now meets the 1997 PM 2.5 health-based standards. Therefore, the Department of Environmental Protection (Department) plans to submit a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to redesignate this area to attainment.

The Department is seeking public comment on this request and on a proposed State Implementation Plan revision containing the 2007 comprehensive inventory and a maintenance plan de monstrating that the area can maintain the standard for the next 10 years as required under section 175A(a) of the Federal Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.A. § 7505a(a)). Upon EPA approval, the maintenance plan will also establish new motor vehicle emission budgets for purposes of transportation conformity.

The request to redesignate the area to attainment and the proposed State Implementation Plan revision 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, October 23, 2013, at 11 a.m. at the Department's Reading District Office, 1005 Crossroads Boulevard, Reading, PA 19605. Persons wishing to present testimony at the hearing should contact Alex Haas, P. O. Box 8468, Harrisburg, PA 17105, (717) 787-9495, alehaas@pa.gov to reserve a time. Witnesses should keep testimony to 10 minutes and should provide two written copies of their statement at the hearing.

If by October 21, 2013, no person has expressed an interest in testifying at the hearing, the hearing will be cancelled. The Department will notify the public 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.htm. Persons may also contact the Department to find out if the hearing is cancelled by contacting Alex Haas at (717) 787-9495 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 th e 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 October 25, 2013. Written comments

shoul d be sent to the attention of Nancy Herb, Bureau of Air Quality, P. O. Box 8468, Harrisburg, PA 17105-8468, nherb@pa.gov. Use ''Reading PM 2.5 Redesignation'' as the subject

line in written communication.

E. CHRISTOPHER ABRUZZO, Secretary

[Pa.B. Doc. No. 13-1730. Filed for public inspection September 20, 2013, 9:00 a.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.

webmaster@PaBulletin.com