Mr. Shawn M. GarvinRegional Administrator

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III

1650 Arch Street (Mail Code: 3RAOO)

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029

Dear Mr. Garvin:

Thank you for your December 9, 2011, letter concerning the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency’s (EPA) “preliminary response” to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s designation

recommendations for the 2008 ozone national ambient air quality standard NAAQS), The

Commonwealth’s initial recommendations were submitted to EPA on March 17, 2009 and

subsequently revised on November 22, 2011.

In response to the designation recommendations for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, you have proposed

the following nonattainment area boundaries, based on 2008-2010 monitoring data:

• Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery and Philadelphia counties in the Pennsylvania

portion of the Philadelphia area plus counties in New Jersey, Delaware and Maryland

• Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, Butler, Fayette, Washington and Westmoreland counties

in the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley area

• Carbon, Lehigh and Northampton counties in the Allentown-Bethiehem-Easton area

• Lancaster County

• Berks County

Your December 9, 2011, letter also stated that EPA intends to designate all other areas ofthe

state as unclassifiable/attainment, You also advised that any additional information that theCommonwealth would like EPA to consider should be provided by February .9, 2012,

Based on certified ambient ozone monitoring data for 2009-20 1 1, the DEP recommended smaller

nonattainment areas for the Philadelphia, Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley and Allentown-BethlehemEaston areas. Although we recommended nonattainment boundaries only for counties with

monitors violating the ozone standard, we recognize that use ofthe same nonattainment area

boundaries, based primarily on the same metropolitan statistical areas as for the 1997 and 2008

ozone standards, should preserve continuity of planning for both the DEP and the regional

transportation planning agencies. However, we request that EPA base its final designations on

Pennsylvania’s 2009-2011 ozone monitoring data, which was certified and submitted to EPA

November 2011.

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

717.787.2814 ntd on Recycled Paper www.depweb.state.pa.us
the recommendations of the State of Delaware and other states, including Connecticut andMaryland. The Environmental Integrity Project (EJP) also submitted comments in support

of a large ozone nonattainment area. Additionally, the Sierra Club agreed with, adopted and

incorporated by reference the arguments of the ALA and EIP concerning the creation of a

“large regional nonattainment area in the Eastern United States.”

In your preliminary responses to the States of Delaware and Maryland, you concluded that a

large multi-state nonattainment area is “not in keeping with a plain reading ofthe CAA section

107(d) related to the contribution in a ‘nearby’ area.” You further concluded that the “CAA has

other provisions to address regional transport,” The DEP agrees with EPA’s conclusion-- the

creation of large multi-state nonattainment areas is contrary to the plain reading of Section

107(d) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7407(d). Your conclusion is also supported by the court’s ruling

in Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. EPA, 429 F.3d 1125, in which the court gave deference to

EPA’s reasonable interprtation of the term “nearby” in 42 U.S.C. § 7407(d)(l)(A)(i) to “requirelocally-based nonattainment areas.”

We also want to mention our support of EPA’s acceptance of our recommendations in the

following areas:

• Proposed designation of a stand-alone Berks County area• Unclassifiable/attainment designation for Pike County

• Unclassifiable/attainment designation for Lawrence County

To this end, additional information which explains our support of EPA’s preliminary response to

the Commonwealth’s designation recommendations for the 2008 ozone standard is enclosed for

your information and reference.

Should you have questions or need additional information, please contact Joyce E. Epps,

Director of the Bureau of Air Quality, by e-mail atjeeppspa.gov or by telephone at

717-787-9702.

Sincerely,

L. Krancer

Secretary
o

008 

Q

y 

(

g

7882), The Department ofEnvironmental Protection is providing the information set forth belowin response to the comments.

ReadingComments were submitted to EPA recommending that the agency include Reading (Berks

County) in the nonattainment area that includes the greater Philadelphia area because Reading is

part ofthe Philadelphia-Camden-Vineland Consolidated Statistical Area (CSA). The

Commonwealth disagrees with this suggestion and supports EPA’s proposal to designate Berics

County as a single county nonattainment area for the following reasons,

• The Commonwealth’s recommendation and EPA’s preliminary response are consistent

with the Office ofManagement and Budget (0MB) definition. The 0MB defines the

Reading metropolitan statistical area as an area that consists of only Berks County.

Although the 0MB added Berks County to the Philadelphia CSA in 2006 because of

increasing commuting ties to the larger area, Berks County traditionally has its own

planning functions, including its own countywide transportation planning organization.The EPA designated Berks County as a single-county nonattainment area for the 1-hourozone standard, the 1997 8-hour ozone standard and the 1997 fine particulate matterstandard.

• Analysis ofthe most current work destination data for Berks County’ indicates that in

2009, 57.7 percent ofthe employment of Berks County residents was in Berks County.

• The Reading Air Basin, defined in 25 Pa. Code § 121,1 and codified in 40 CFR 52.2020,

covers portions ofBerks County and no other county.

• Based on the 2008 National Emissions Inventory shown below, VOC and NOx emissions

(tons per year) in Berks County are low compared to emissions in the 5-county

Philadelphia Area. The five Pennsylvania counties (Bucks, Chester, Delaware,Montgomery and Philadelphia) are part of a much larger CSA, which in turn is only partof the proposed four-state Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City nonattainment area.

Therefore, the inclusion of Berks County in the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic Cityarea is unlikely to have a significant effect on the area attaining the standard. 

U S Bureau Longitudinal_Household Employer Dynamics at//Iehd did census gay/led!
areas for the 1997 ozone NAAQS include: Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle area to the west,

Lancaster to the southwest, the Philadelphia area to the southeast, and the Allentown

Bethlehem-Easton area to the northeast. To the extent that emissions from adjacent

counties may contribute to ozone concentrations in Berks County or that emissions from

Berks County contribute to ozone concentrations downwind, the contribution will be

lessened by controls put in place in those separate nonattainment areas and statewide.

Pike CountyComments were submitted to EPA recommending that P11cc County be designated as

nonattainment because it is part of the CSA for New York-Newark- Bridgeport. TheCommonwealth disagrees with the commentator and supports EPA’s proposal to designate Pike

County as unclassifiable/attainment for the following reasons.

• Compared to the population ofthe rest of the New York-Newark-Bridgeport CSA— the

most populous area in the United States -- Pike County’s population is very small, with

only 57,369 people 2.There are no major facilities in the county. Therefore, the ozone

precursor emissions in Pike County are an insignificant contribution to the CSA.

• About 63 percent ofthe employment of Pike County residents is in Pennsylvania. 3Pike

County is not part of the transportation planning area for areas in New York, New Jersey

or Connecticut, but is part ofthe Northeast Pennsylvania Rural Transportation Planning

Organization with four other rural Pennsylvania counties.

Lawrence CountyComments were submitted to EPA recommending that Lawrence County be designated as

nonattainment because it is part ofthe CSA for Pittsburgh and New Castle. The Commonwealthdisagrees and supports EPA’s proposal to designate Lawrence County asunclassifiable/attainment for the following reasons.

• Lawrence County is a single county micropolitan statistical area adjacent to the greater

Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley area. The county’s micropolitan statistical area status indicatesa lower level ofsocial and economic ties to the Pittsburgh metropolitan area counties than

counties included in the metropolitan statistical area. EPA did not include Lawrence

2 U.S. Census Quick Facts at http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/42000.html

SsusBureau Lcjgj HQusebold Empgyynamics at hftp://1ehd.id.censusgov/leW

2
, 

a 

g

p

p

3