### UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 8



### Ref : 8P-AR Bryce Bird, Director Utah Division ofAir Quality P

.0

.Box 144820 Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4820
DearMr. Bird: 1595Wynkoop Street DENVER, CO 80202-1129 Phone 800-227-8917 http://www.epa

.gov/region08



## MAR 2 42015

On March 16,2015, EPAreceived a letterdated March 9, 2015,from GovernorHerbertwhich submitted the StateImplementation Planrevisions "UtahAirQualityRuleR307-3l 1; Utah CountyTradingof Emission Budgetsfor TransportationConformity."In addition, we receivedyourletter, dated March 11, 2015, whichprovidedthe necessary administrativedocumentationto supportthe Governor's submittal. We have determined thatthese submittedrevisions to the Utah StateImplementationPlan are administrativelyand technicallycompletewithrespectto theprovisionsofsection 110 ofthe CleanAir Actandthe regulatoryprovisions in 40 CFR51 AppendixV. We are nowreviewingthe submissionto prepare aNotice ofProposedRulemakingwhichwill evaluatewhetherthe state's submissioncanbe approved

. Ifmembers ofyour staffhave any questions,pleasehavethem contactTimRuss ofmy staffat 303-312

- 6479 oremail atruss.tim@epa.gov. 

# WJ

Carl Daly,

# Direc~ AirProgram

@ PrintedonRecycledPaper

## Completeness Determination Completed by: 

### TimRuss, AirProgram,USEPA, Region 8 Date: 

### March 16, 2015 

### 40 CFR 51 APPENDIX V CRITERIA

2.1 Administrative Materials

(a) A formal letter of submittal from the Governor or his designee, requesting EPA approval of the plan or revision thereof (hereafter "the plan"). (b) Evidence that the State has adopted the plan in the State code or body of regulations; or issued the permit, order, consent agreement (hereafter "document") in final form. That evidence shall include the date of adoption or final issuance as well as the effective date of the plan, if different from the adoption/issuance date. (c) Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authority under State law to adopt and implement the plan.

(d) A copy of the actual regulation, or document submitted for approval and incorporation by reference into the plan, including indication of the changes made to the existing approved plan, where applicable. The submittal shall be a copy of the official State regulation/document signed, stamped, dated by the appropriate State official indicating that it is fully enforceable by the State. The effective date of the regulation/document shall, whenever possible, be indicated in the document itself.

(e) Evidence that the State followed all of the procedural requirements of the State's laws and constitution in conducting and completing the adoption/issuance of the plan. 

### SUBMITTAL ITEM Utah State Implementation Plan Approval Request; R307- 311, Utah County Trading of Emission Budgets for Transportation Conformity, as adopted by the Utah Air Quality Board (UAQB) on March 4, 2015. Submittal letter dated March 9, 2015 from Gary R. Herbert, Governor of Utah and Administrative Documents as submitted by a letter dated March 11, 2015 by Bryce Bird, Director, Utah Division of Air Quality (UDAQ), Utah Department of Environmental Quality (UDEQ)

. The UAQB adopted the revisions to R307-311, Utah County Trading of Emission Budgets for Transportation Conformity, on March 4, 2015. The revisions became State effective on March 5, 2015.

The State's legal authority is provided under the tab "CODES" of the Administrative Documents submi ttal. The CODES tab provides copies of "Title 19 Environmental Quality Code, Chapter 2, Air Conservation Act" and "Rl5, Administrative Services, Administrative Rules." The State's submittal contained the following documents: A.) 12/04/2014 version of the proposed revisions (new language shown) of the R307-311, Utah County Trading of Emission Budgets for Transportation Conformity. EPA notes that the Technical Support Document (TSD) was also proposed on January 12, 2015 and the public comment period was extended to February 12, 2015

. B.) 3/5/15 Effective Rule and TSD were provided with submittal. Effective date does not appear directly in the final version of the document itself, but the State provided documentation that the final version of the revisions became State effective on March 5, 2015. The "Certification Page" document is signed by Mark W. Berger, Rules Coordinator for the Utah Division of Air Quality, that all necessary State procedures were followed. The certification page is signed as of March 11, 2015.

### 40 CFR 51 APPENDIX V CRITERIA (f) Evidence that public notice was given of the proposed change consistent with procedures approved by EPA, including the date of publication of such notice. (g) Certification that public hearings(s) were held in accordance with the information provided in the public notice and the State's laws and constitution, if applicable.

(h) Compilation of public comments and the State's response thereto

.

2.2 Technical Support

(a) Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the plan.

(b) Identification of the locations of affected sources including the EPA attainment/nonattainment designation of the locations and the status of the attainment plan for the affected areas(s)

.

(c) Quantification of the changes in plan allowable emissions from the affected sources; estimates of changes in current actual emission from affected sources or, where appropriate, quantification of changes in actual emission from affected sources through calculations of the differences between certain baseline levels and allowable emissions anticipated as a result of the revision. 

### SUBMITTAL ITEM Evidence was provided, in the Administrative Documents, of the Public Notice as was provided in Utah State Bulletin dated January 1, 2015.

The Administrative Documents state that on December 4, 2014, the UAQB proposed for public comment the revisions to R307-311, Utah County Trading of Emission Budgets for Transportation Conformity. The Administrative Documents state that a public comment period was held from January 1, 2015 to February 12, 2015. The only comments received were from EPA Region 8 dated February 12, 2015. The Administrative Documents state that the public comments from EPA Region 8 only addressed concerns with the TSD and not R307-311. The EPA comments were addressed by the UDAQ in a memorandum, dated February 19, 2015, from Bryce Bird, UDAQ, to the UAQB. The TSD was proposed for public comment from January 12, 2015 to February 12, 2015

. The final TSD was provided with the Administrative Documentation for the effective rule. In SIP revision Utah Air Quality Rule R307-311 addresses PM1o and NOx. The TSD addresses PM10 and NOx. For purposes of CAA section 110(1), the TSD also addresses PM2.s, CO, and N02

. Locations of sources (vehicles) affected by R307-311 are in Utah County, UT. The SIP revision is designed to address trading of PM10 and NOx Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (MVEB) for purposes of Transportation Conformity. R307-311 was prepared for use by the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), which is Mountainland Association of Governments (MAG) ,for use in transportation conformity determinations. The Utah County PM10 element of the SIP was last updated by EPA on 12/23/2002 (67 FR 78181) with approved revisions to the nonattainment area's plan. The Governor's March 9, 2015 SIP revision submittal and the March 11, 2015 Administrative Documents submittals identified the trading ratios for PM10 to NOx

. The TSO provided the necessary information for the derivation of the trading ratios and an evaluation of the potential effects on other pollutants.

### 40 CFR 51 APPENDIX V CRITERIA (d) The State's demonstration that the national ambient air quality standards, prevention of significant deterioration increments, reasonable further progress demonstration, and visibility, as applicable, are protected if the plan is approved and implemented. (e) Modeling information required to support the proposed revision, including input data, output data, models used, justification of model selections, ambient monitoring data used, meteorological data used, justification for use of offsite data (where used) , modes of models used, assumptions, and other information relevant to the determination of adequacy of the modeling analysis. (f) Evidence, where necessary, that emission limitations are based on continuous emission reduction technology. (g) Evidence that the plan contains emission limitations, work practice standards and recordkeeping/ reporting requirements, where necessary, to ensure emission levels

. (h) Compliance/enforcement strategies, including how compliance will be determined in practice

.

(i) Special economic and technological justifications required by any applicable EPA policies. 

### SUBMITTAL ITEM The TSD provided with the effective R307

- 311 provides information and data to support the MVEB PM1o and NOx trading provisions. In addition, the TSD provides a CAA section 110(1) analysis of potential implications to other pollutants of concern.

The TSD provided with the effective R307-311 provides information and data to support the MVEB PM10 and NOx trading provisions. Much of the data to support the derivation of the MVEB trading ratios was extracted by the UDAQ from relevant information contained in the Utah County PM2

.s Impracticability Demonstration nonattainment plan

. That plan was submitted to EPA by the Governor on 12/ 16/ 14. In addition, the TSD provides a CAA section 110(1) analysis of potential implications to other pollutants of concern.
Not Applicable

.

The trading of the PM1o and NOx MVEBs is to be fully documented by MAG when the provisions of R307-311 are utilized for a transportation conformity determination

. The specific requirements that are to be documented by MAG are presented in the section of the Rule entitled "R307-311-4, Trading Between Emission Budgets." Specific compliance and enforcement strategies are not presented in R307-311. However, trading of the PM1o and NOx MVEBs is to be fully documented by MAG when the provisions of R307-311 are utilized for a transportation conformity determination

. The specific requirements that are to be documented by MAG are presented in the section of the Rule entitled "R307- 311-4, Trading Between Emission Budgets

. " In addition, when a transportation conformity determination is submitted to FHWA by MAG for a finding, both EPA and FHWA will also be reviewing the transportation conformity determination to ensure that the aspects of R307-311 are appropriately used by MAG (if MAG elects to use R307-311)

. EPA notes that R307-311 was prepared by UDAQ to address the provisions contained in 40 CFR 93.124(b). We note that a similar MVEB emission trading rule was approved by EPA on July 1 , 2002 (67 FR 44065) for Salt Lake County for use by the Wasatch Front Regional Council which is the MPO for that area . Refer to Utah Rule R307-310

.