### .·

SUBJECT:

FROM:

TO:

THRU: UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION III 1650 Arch Street Philadelphia, Maryland 19103

Technical Support Document (TSD)

- Adequacy Findings for the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEBs) in the 1997 Annual Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.s) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) and the 2006 24-Hour PM2

.s NAAQS Maintenance Plan for the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, Pennsylvania (PA) Nonattainment Area

# GregoryBeco~ O'/

# 1~>),.;- 0ffice ofAir Program Planning (3AP30)

Administrative Record for the Adequacy Findings for the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEBs) in the 1997 Annual Fine Particulate Matter (PM2

.s) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) and the 2006 24-HourPM2

.s NAAQS Maintenance Plan for the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, Pennsylvania (PA) Nonattainment Area

# ~1\._**. ~**  'D'i/ Z3j /) CristinaFernandez, Associate Director Office ofAir Program Planning (3AP30)
I. Background
OnJanuary 5, 2005 (70 FR 944, 1014), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published air quality area designations for the 1997 PM2.s NAAQS. In that rulemaking action, EPA designated the Pittsburgh-BeaverValley Area as nonattainment for the 1997 annual PM2.s standard. The Pittsburgh-BeaverValley Area includes Beaver, Butler, Washington, Westmoreland counties andportions ofAllegheny, Armstrong, Green and Lawrence Counties in the Commonwealth ofPennsylvania. On October 12,2012 (77 FR62147), EPA determined that the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Areahad attained the 1997 PM2.s NAAQS based on qualityassured, quality-controlled, and certified ambient air monitoring data that showthe Areahas monitored attainment based on 2008-2010 and 2009-2011 data.
OnNovember 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688), EPApublished air quality area designations for the 2006 PM2

.sNAAQS. In that rulemaking action, EPA designated the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area as nonattainment for the 2006 daily PM2

.s standard. OnMay 2, 2014 (79 FR 25014), EPAdetermined thatthe Pittsburgh-BeaverValley Areahad attained the 2006 daily PM2.s NAAQS based on quality-assured, quality-controlled, and certified ambient air monitoring data that show the Area has monitored attainment based on 2010-2012 data.
II. Transportation Conformity Requirements Transportation conformity is required under section 176(c) ofthe Clean Air Act (CAA) to ensure that federally supported highway, transit projects, and other activities are consistent with (conform to) the purpose ofthe State ImplementationPlan (SIP). The CAArequires federal actions in nonattainment and maintenance areas to "conformto" the goals ofSIP. This means that such actions will not cause orcontribute to violations ofa NAAQS; worsen the severity of
an existing violation; or delay timely attainment ofany NAAQS or any interim milestone. Actions involving Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) orFederal Transit Administration (FTA) funding or approval are subjectto the Transportation Conformity Rule (40 CFRpart 93, subpart A). Underthis rule, metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) in nonattainment and maintenance areas coordinate with state air quality and transportation agencies, EPA, FHW A, and FTA to demonstrate that their metropolitan transportation plans and transportation improvement plans (TIPs) conform to applicable SIPs. This is typically determined by showing that estimated emissions from existing and planned highway and transit systems are less than or equal to the MVEBs contained in a SIP. Transportation agencies in Pennsylvania are responsible for making timelytransportation conformity determinations. The responsible agency in the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area, designated as the MPO under federal transportation planning requirements is Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission (SPC).
For MVEBs to be approvable, they must meet, at a minimum, EPA's adequacy criteria found at 40 CFR93.118(e)(4). EPA's adequacy criteria are: (1) the submitted control strategy implementation plan was endorsed by the Governor or designee and was subject to a State public hearing; (2) consultation among Federal, State, and local agencies occurred; full implementation plan documentation was provided to EPA; and EPA's stated concerns, ifany, were addressed before the control strategy implementation plan was submitted; (3) the MVEBs are clearly identified and precisely quantified; (4) the MVEBs, when considered together with all other emissions sources, are consistent with applicable requirements for maintenance; (5) the MVEBs are consistent with and clearly related to the emissions inventory and the control measures in the submitted control strategy implementationplan; and (6) revisions to previously submitted maintenance plans explain and document any changes to previously submitted budgets and control measures; impacts onpoint and area source emissions; any changes to established safety margins; and reasons for the changes (including the basis for any changes related to emission factors or estimates ofvehicle miles traveled).
III. Review ofthe Submitted Modeling Utilizing the Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES2010) Pennsylvania Department ofEnvironmental Protection (PADEP) utilized MOVES2010ato produce MVEBs for years 2017 and 2025. To utilize the MOVES2010amodel, several different

2models were used to provide the necessary inputs into MOVES2010a. One ofthe models, PPSUITE, was utilized to provide inputs as well as to post-process the output files from MOVES2010a.
The appropriate traffic related inputs which were processed by PPSUITE were input into MOVES201Oa. Additional traffic related inputs as well as non-traffic related inputs were provided as well. The data was input into MOVES201 Oa via the county data manager. The county datamanager is a function ofthe MOVES2010a model which allows county specific data inputs to be converted into a usable form by MOVES2010a. Atthatpoint a Run Specification (RunSpec), which is a function ofMOVES201 Oa that allows the userto input necessary parameters into the model, was created and run in batch mode. The outputs were provided as an inventory because vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and vehicle population were provided to MOVES2010a.
EPA reviewed the modeling methodology utilized by PADEP and all modeling related informationto produce the MVEBs for years 2017 and 2025. EPA found that all necessary and required modeling procedures were followed inthe production ofthe 2017 and 2025 MVEBs which were produced using MOVES201 Oa.


### IV. Administrative Requirements for Making Adequacy Findings
EPA followed the process for determining the adequacy ofthe submitted SIP MVEBs in accordance with the procedures listed in the January 2008 Conformity Regulations contained in 40 CFRpart 93, 118(f) "Adequacyreview process for implementationplan submissions." EPA will be issuing a notice ofproposedrulemaking (NPR) for a 30-daypublic commentperiod soliciting public comment for the approvability ofthe Commonwealth ofPennsylvania's SIP submission. The NPR also proposes approval ofthe MVEBs for milestone year 2017 and the out-year 2025 for the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA 1997 PM2.s and 2006 PM2

.sNonattainment Area for PM2

.sand nitrogen oxides (NOx) for transportation conformitypurposes. The public will have the opportunityto comment onthe adequacy/approvability ofthe budgets inthe SIP revision. Following EPA's public commentperiod, responses to any comments received on the proposed mobile budgets in the Commonwealth ofPennsylvania's SIP will be addressed in the final rulemaking notice.
Shown in Table 1 are the budgets from the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA Maintenance Plan for milestone year 2017 and the out-year 2025 for PM2

.sand NOx. The MVEBs will be applied to all future transportation conformity determinations and analyses for the 1997 PM2

.sNAAQS and 2006 daily PM2.s NAAQS.



### Table 1. 

### On-Road MVEBs Contained in the Pittsburgh-BeaverValley, PA for the 1997 PM2.s NAAQS and 2006 

### PM2.s NAAQS NonattainmentArea Maintenance Plan Year Motor Vehicle Emissions Mobile Vehicle Emissions Budget for PM2.s On-Road Budget for NOxOn-Road Emissions (tons per year) Emissions (tons per year)

3

### 12017 2025 

### 1 17,584 10,709

V. Evaluation ofthe Adequacy ofthe MVEBs in the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA Maintenance Plan for the 1997 PM2.s NAAQS and 2006 PM2.s NAAQS
In this TSD, EPA is evaluating the MVEBs associated with the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA Maintenance Plan for conformity purposes. EPA is using the evaluation 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, beiow.
ri'able 2. Adequacy ofthe MVEBs Contained in the Pittsburgh-BeaverValley, PA Maintenance Plan for the 1997 PM2.s NAAQS and 2006 PM2.s NAAQS

Transportation Conformity Review Criteria Was the Criterion Satisfied? Rule IfYes Howwas this Criteria 40 CFRPart 93, 93.118 Satisfied?

93.102(b)(2)(iv) Have EPA and the Neither EPA nor the Commonwealth made a Commonwealth have made finding that NOx is an such a finding. insignificant contributor to the direct mobile PM emissions?

93.102(b)(2)(v) Has EPA or the Neither EPA northe Commonwealth made a Commonwealthhave made finding that volatile organic any findings that VOCs, SOx, compounds (VOCs), Sulfur orNH3 are significant Oxides (SOx) orAmmonia contributors to the PMz

.s (NH3) as precursors to be a mobile emissions. significant contributor to the mobile PMz.s emissions?
93.102(b)(3) Has the EPA orthe Neither EPA northe Commonwealth made a Commonwealth have made finding that re-entrained road such a finding. dust is a significant contributorto the PMmobile emissions?
Sec. 93.118(e)(4)(i) Was the submitted revised Yes. The Pittsburgh-Beaver plan endorsed by the Valley, PA Maintenance Plan

4Governor (or his orher was endorsed and submitted designee) and subject to a as a SIP revision by the Commonwealthpublic Governor's designee, the hearing? Acting Secretary ofPADEP, Dana K. Aunkst. A public hearing was held on December 16, 2014. During the public participation process, which closed on December 16,2014, PADEP did notreceive any written comments or oral testimony. Sec. 93.118(e)(4)(ii) Before the maintenance plan Yes. Consultationhas was submitted to EPA, did occurred among all required consultationbetween federal, federal, State and local State and local agencies agencies. occur; was full implementation plan documentationprovided to EPA, and was. EPA's stated concerns, ifany, addressed?
Sec. 93.118(e)(4)(iii) Was the motor vehicle Yes, the budgets are clearly emissions budget(s) clearly identified onpages 39-41 of identified and precisely the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, quantified? PA Maintenance Plan prepared by the Pennsylvania Department ofEnvironmental Protection. Sec. 93.118(e)(4)(iv) Is the motorvehicle EPAbelieves the budgets can emissions budget(s), when be declared adequate because considered together with all in conjunction with the other other emission reductions, emission reductions, they consistentwith applicable demonstrate continued requirements for maintenance for years 2017 maintenance? and 2025.

Sec. 93.118(e)(4)(v) Is the motorvehicle EPAbelieves that the budgets emissions budget(s) are clearly related to the consistent with and clearly emissions inventory and the related to the emissions control measures inthe SIP inventory and the control submittal.
measures inthe Plan?

5Sec. 93.118(e)(4)(vi) Revisions to previously Yes, the Pittsburgh-Beaver submitted attainment Valley, PA Maintenance Plan demonstrations: explain and provides new MVEBs for document any changes to years 2017 and 2025 for previously submitted budgets PMz

.5and 

### NOx. The addition and control measures; ofsafety margins to the impacts onpoint and area MVEBs is consistent with
source emissions; any continued attainment. changes to established safety margins (see Sec. 93.101 for definition); and reasons for the changes (including the basis for any changes related to emission factors or estimates ofvehicle miles traveled).
Sec. 93.118(e)(5) Did they provide and we Yes reviewed public comments and the Commonwealth's responses to those comments withthe submitted control strategy SIP?



### VI. Findings
Basedupon our review and evaluation ofthe MVEBs contained inthe Maintenance Planfor the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA 1997 PMz

. 5

NAAQS and 2006 PMz.5 NAAQS Nonattainment Area, EPA finds the MVEBs adequate for conformity purposes and recommends thatthe MVEBs be SIP approved.

6