1 **UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION III**  **1650 Arch Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103** 
October 6 , 20 11
**SUB JECT**  : Technical Support Document

- Adequacy Findings for the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in the A ttainment Demonstration f or the Pennsylvania Portion of the Philadelphia

- Wilmington

- New Jersey City 1997 Fine Particulate ( PM 2.5 ) National Ambient Air quality Standard (NAAQS) Nonattainmen t Area

**FROM:** /s/

Martin Kotsch, Office of Air Program Planning (3AP30)
**TO:** Administrative Record for the Adequacy Findings for the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in the Attainment Demonstration for the Pennsylvania Portion of the Philade lphia

- Wilmington

- New Jerse y 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS Nonattainment Area /s/ **THRU:** Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director,

Office of Air Program Planning (3AP30) **I. Administrative Requirements for Making Adequacy Findings**
We have followed the process for determining the adequacy of the submitted S tate I mplementation P lan (SI P) Motor Vehicle Emissions B udgets (MVEBs) in accordance with the procedures listed in the January 2008 Conformity

Regulations contained in 40 CFR p art 93, 118(f) “ Adequ acy

review process for implementation plan submissions ”

. On April 1 2 , 20 10 , the Pennsylvania Department of Environment al Protection ( PA DE P ) formally submitted an A ttainment D emonstration P lan for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS (hereafter the attainment demonstrat ion) for the Pennsylvania Portion of the Philadelphia

- Wilmington

- New Jersey PM 2.5 Nonattainment Area as SI P revision. EPA will be issuing i ts own Notice of Proposed Rule m aking for a 30

- day public comment period soliciting public comment as to the approv ability of the Pennsylvania SI P submission. Concurrently

with EPA ’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, a notice will be posted on EPA’s website at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm for the purpose of opening EPA’s 30

- day

public co mment period on the adequacy /approvability

of the budgets in the SI P revision. That notice will inform the public of the availability of the Pennsylvania SI P revision on its own website. EPA’s website notice will provide a link to the address for the web site where interested members of the public could access the SI P revision. Following EPA’s2

public comment period, responses to any comments received on the proposed mobile budgets in the Pennsylvania SI P will be addressed in an amendment to this Technical Support Document ( TSD )

. Shown below in Table 1 are the 2 sets of budgets from the SI P submittal.
**Table 1**  **The Budgets of the Pennsylvania Portion of**  **Philadelphia**

**- Wilmington** 

**- Atlantic City**  **1997**

**PM 2.5**  **NAAQS Attainment Demonstration** 

Plan Submittals Miles tone

Year Mobile

Vehicle Emissions Budget for Direct PM

Tons Per Year Mobile

Vehicle Emissions Budget for NOx

- Tons Per Year Attainment Plan Demonstration 2009 699 36,318

**II . Evaluation of the Adequacy of the MVEBs Budgets in the**  **Attainment De monstration**  **for the**  **Pennsylvania Portion of the Philadelphia** 

**- Wilmington** 

**- New Jerse**  **y 1997 NAAQS**  **PM 2.5**  **Nonattainment Area Submitted**  **b y**  **PADEP on**  **A pril**  **1 2**  **, 20 10** 
Inthis TSD, we are evaluating the MVEBs associated with the 2009 a ttainment d emonstration p lan c ontained in the April 12 , 20 10 SI P submittal, for conformity purposes. We are using the
e valuation criteria detailed in the Transportation Conformity Rule, 40 CFR part 93.102(b)(2)(v), 93.102(b)(2)(v), 93.102(b)(3) , and part 93, 93.118(e)4 through 93.118( e)5. The evaluation is presented in Table 2 , below.
**Table 2**  **Adequacy of the MVEBs Contained in the**  **Attainment Demonstration**  **for the Pennsylvania**  **Portion of Philadelphia**

**- Wilmington** 

**- New Jersey**  **City 1997 NAAQS**  **PM 2.5**  **N on**  **- attainment**  **Area**

Transportation Conf

ormity Rule 40 CFR Part 93, 93.118 Review Criteria Was the Criterion Satisfied? If Yes How was this Criteria Satisfied?
93.102(b)(2)(iv) Have EPA and the State made a finding that NOx is an insignificant contributor to the direct mobile PM EPA and the State have not made such a finding.3 emissions? 93.102(b)(2)(v) Has EPA or State made a finding that VOCs, Sulf

ur Oxides (SOx) or Ammonia (NH 3 ) as precursors to be a significant contributor to the mobile PM 2.5 emissions? Neither EPA or the State has made such a finding.

93.102(b)(3) Has the EPA or the State made a finding that re

entrained road dust is a significant contributor to the PM mobile emissions? Neither EPA or the State has made such a finding.

Sec. 93.118(e)(4)(i) Was the submitted revised plan endorsed by

the Governor (or his or her designee) and subject to a State public hearing? Yes. The submitted and attainment demonstration was endorsed and submitted as a SI P revision by the Governor ’ s designee, the Secretary of the PADEP , and a publi c hearing was held. Sec. 93.118(e)(4)(ii) Before the attainment demonstration was submitted to EPA, did consultation between federal, State and local agencies occur; was full implementation plan documentation provided to EPA, and was EPA ’ s stated
concerns , if any , addressed? Yes. Consultation has occurred among all required federal, state and local agencies.

Sec. 93.118(e)(4)(iii) Was the motor vehicle emissions budget(s) clearly identified and precisely quantified? Yes, the budgets are clearly ident ified on page 22 of the April 12, 2010 submittal containing the attainment d emonstration. Sec. 93.118(e)(4)(iv) Is the motor vehicle emissions budget(s), when considered together with all other emission reductions, consistent with applicable requiremen ts for attainment demonstrations? EPA believes the budgets can be declared adequate because in conjunction with the other emission reductions, they demonstrate attainme n t for 20 10

.4

Sec. 93.118(e)(4)(v) Is the motor vehicle emissions budget(s)
cons istent with and clearly related to the emissions inventory and the control measures in the Plan? EPA believes that the budgets are clearly

related to the emissions inventory

and the control measures in the SI P submittal.

Sec. 93.118(e)(4)(vi) Revisions to previously submitted attainment demonstrations: explain and document any

changes to previously

submitted budgets and control measures; impacts on point and area source emissions; any changes to established safety margins (see Sec. 93.101 for definitio n); and reasons for the changes (including the basis for any

changes related to emission factors or estimates of vehicle miles traveled). N/A

Sec. 93.118(e)(5) Did they provide and we review public comments and the State ’ s responses to those comments w ith the submitted control strategy

SI P? There w ere no comment s on

the proposed mobile emissions budgets in the SI P.

**III. Findings** 

- Based upon our review and evaluation of the MVEBs contained in PADEP ’ s April 1 2 , 20 10 submittal of the attainment p lan f or the Pennsylvania Portion of Philadelphia

Wilmington

- New Jersey 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS nonattainment area, we find the said MVEBs adequate for conformity

purposes.