Cache Valley Idaho PM 2.5 Nonattainment Area SIP

47 

### section 5.1.1 and depicted in Figure 24 , SO 2 

### from transportation on the Idaho side of the CVNAA is not significantly contributing to nonattainment. Therefore, Idaho is making the determination to not include SO 2 

### emissions in the MV EB. Idaho will includ e NO x 

### , VOC

, and reentrained road dust in the MVEB.

The Utah side of the CVNAA will continue to use the C ache Valley MPO for future conformity determinations. Since the Idaho side of the CVNAA does not have an established MPO

, the entir e Franklin County will be considered a rural donut area for conformity purposes. R ural donut areas are geographic areas outside a metropolitan planning area boundary but inside the boundary of a nonattainment or maintenance area that contains any part of a metropolitan area as described in 40 CFR 93.101.

5.5.2 M otor V ehicle E mission Budget

The MVEB is comprised of on

- road mobile sources including fugitive dust from paved and unpaved roads and vehicle emissions (exhaust, tire, and brake wear). EPA’s MOVES model w as used to develop vehicle emissions estimates for the MVEB. The MVEB becomes applicable when the EPA determines that the budget is adequate for transportation conformity purposes. In accordance with the conformity rule, the emissions budget a ct s as a ceil ing on emissions in the year for which it is defined or until a SIP revision modifie s the budget.

The MVEB is developed as part of the SIP to place a ceiling or cap on emissions from transportation projects. The conformity process compares projected emiss ions from the TIPs and LRTPs with the budgeted emissions set out in the SIP MVEB. The emissions budgets included as part of this SIP are show n in Table 9

. T he conformity rule will require the emission projections from future TIPs and LRTPs be less than or equal to the budget levels. The conformity process en sures that transportation projects w ill not cause or contribute to NAAQS violations.

Table 9 . Motor v ehicle e mission b udget for the Idaho side of the Cache Valley n onattainment a rea

.

Year County NO x ( ton/day ) VOC ( ton/day ) Total PM 2.5 ( ton/day )

2008 Franklin 0.879 0.612 0.496

2014 Franklin 0.501 0.386 0.429

2019 Franklin 0.360 0.263 0. 429

Notes : nitrogen oxides (NO x ); volatile organic compounds (VOC); particulate matter 2.5 (PM 2.5 )



### 5.5.3 Adequacy Determination

Before the MVEB can be used for conformity purposes

, it must demonstrate adequacy. For EPA to determine the MVEB is adequate, the conformity rule requires that MVEB emissions must be considered with all other emissions sources and be consistent with the applicable SIP. Modeling must demonstrate that all emi ssion sources combined (point, area, and mobile sources) will not cause or contribute to a violation of the PM 2.5 

### NAAQS. As discussed above

, a modeling demonstration was performed by U DAQ that included point, area

, and mobile sources from bothCache Valley Idaho PM 2.5 Nonattainment Area SIP

48 

### Idaho and Ut ah

, show ing attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS by 2014. This information is available in Appendix B

.



# 6 Administrative Requirements

Table 10 provides a crosswalk between the regulatory requirements in 40 CFR 51 this SIP must address and how Idaho has met the requirements.

Table 10 . Crosswalk between the reg ulatory requirements and how the requirement is met within this S tate I mplementation P lan

.

Regulatory Requirement (paraphrased) How Idaho Met R equirement

§ 51.102 Public hearings. States must provide notice, provide the opportunity to submit written comme nts

, and allow the public the opportunity to request a public hearing. Public participation in the development of this plan is discussed in s ection 6.2.

I DEQ will provide a 30

- day public comment period with a public hearing. Complete documentation of the public comment process will be included with the submittal of this plan to EPA.

§ 51.103 Submission of plans, preliminary review of plans. Idaho will submit plan in accordance to letter from Region 10 date d April 26, 2011.

§ 51.110 Attainment and maintenance of national standards. Each plan providing for the attainment of a primary or secondary standard must specify the projected attainment date. Idaho ’s 2006 PM 2.5 Infrastructure SIP was submitted to EPA June 25, 2010

, and updated August 8, 2011

. The attainment date is January 1, 2015

§ 51.111 Description of control measures.

Each plan must set forth an enforceable control strategy. The control strat egy for Franklin County is discussed in s ection 5.

In addition, the State of Utah has submitted a plan to EPA Region 8 that contains enforceable control measures for Cache County

. § 51.112 Demonstration of adequacy. Each plan must demonstrate that the mea sures, rules, and regulations contained in it are adequate to provide for the timely attainment and maintenance of the national standard that it implements. The adequacy of control measures for Franklin County is discussed in s ections 4 and 5.

In addition, the State of Utah has submitted a plan to EPA Region 8 demonstrating the adequacy of control measures for Cache County.