1 **UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION III**  **1650 Arch Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103** 

October 11 , 20 11

**SUB JECT**  : Technical Support Document

- Adequacy Findings for the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in the A ttainment Demonstration f or the Libert y

- Clairton, Pennsylvania 1997 Fine Particulate ( PM 2.5 ) N ational Ambient Air Q uality Standard (NAAQS) Nonattainment Area

**FROM: /s/** 

Martin Ko tsch, 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 Libert y

- Clairton, Pennsylvania 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 (SIP) Motor Vehicle Emissions B udgets (MVEBs) in accordance with the procedures listed in the January 2008 Conformit y Regulations contained in 40 CFR p art 93, 118(f) “ Adequacy

review process for implementation plan submissions ”

.

On April 1 9 , 20 1 1
, 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 demonstration) for the Liberty

- Clairton, Pennsylvania PM 2.5 Nonattainment Area as a SI P r evision.

Liberty

- Clairton, Pennsylvania is in nonattainment for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS and PADEP has proposed MVEB s for both standards.

EPA will be issuing i ts own Notice of Proposed Rulem aking for a 30

- day public comment period soliciting public comment as to the approvability of the Pennsylvania SIP submission. Concurrentl y 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 comment period on the adequacy /approvability

of the budgets in the SIP revision. That notice will inform the public of the availability of the Pennsylvania SIP revision on its own website. EPA’s website notice will provide a link to the address for the2

website where interested members of the public could access the SIP revision. Following EPA’s public comment period, responses to an y comments received on the proposed mobile budgets in the Pennsylvania SIP 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 SIP submittal.

**Table 1**  **The Budgets of the Liberty** 

**- Clairton, Pennsylvania**  **1997 PM 2.5**  **NAAQS Attainment**  **Demonstration**

Plan Submittals Milestone Year Mobi le

Vehicle Emissions Budget for Direct PM Mobile

Vehicle Emissions Budget for NOx Attainment Plan Demonstration

- Dail y Standard

- Tons Per Day 2009 2011 2012 0 .004

0.004 0.004 0.18 0

0.146 0.129

Attainment Plan Demonstration

- Annual Standard

- Tons Per Year 2009 2011 2012 1.5

1.4 1.3 72.7

58.9 52.4

**II . Evaluation of the Adequacy of the MVEBs Budgets in the**  **Attainment Demonstration for**  **the Liberty** 

**- Clairton, Pennsylvania**  **1997 NAAQS PM**  **2.5 Nonattainment Area**  **Submitted b**  **y PADEP**  **on A**  **pril 1**  **9 , 20**  **1 1** 

In this TSD, we are evaluating the MVEBs associated with the attainment d emonstration p lan contained in the April 1 9
, 20 1 1 SIP 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 Liberty** 

****

**Clairton, Pennsylvania 1997 NAAQS**  **PM 2.5**  **N onattainment**  **Area**

Transportation Conformity Rule 40 CFR Part 93, 93.118 Review Criteria Was the Criterion Satisfied? If Yes How was this Criteria Satisfied?3

93.102(b)(2)(iv) Have EPA and the State made a finding that NOx is an insignificant contributor to the direct mobile PM emissions? EPA and the State have not made such a finding.

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 b y 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 SIP revision by the Governor ’ s de signee, the Secretary of the PADEP , and a public 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 an y, 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 precisel y quantified? Yes, the budgets are clearly identified on page 6 9 of the April 1 9 , 201 1 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 re ductions, consistent with applicable requirements for attainment EPA believes the budgets can be declared adequate because in conjunction with the other emission reductions, they demonstrate attainme nt for 20 1 5

.4 demonstrations?

Sec. 93.118(e)(4)(v) Is the motor vehicle emissions budget(s) consistent with and clearly related to the emissions inventory and the control measures in the Plan? EPA believes that the budgets are clearl y 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 an y changes to previously

submitted budgets and control measures; impacts on point and area source emissions; an y changes to establishe d safety margins (see Sec. 93.101 for definition); and reasons for the changes (including the basis for an y 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 comment s and the State ’ s responses to those comments with the submitted control strategy

SI P? There w as o ne comment on

the proposed mobile emissions budgets in the SI P. However it was not germane to the adequacy

/approvability of the proposed budgets.

**III. Fi**  **ndings**

- Based upon our review and evaluation of the MVEBs contained in PADEP ’ s April 1 9 , 20 1 1 submittal of the attainment p lan for the Li bert y

- Clairton, Pennsylvania 19 97 PM 2.5 NAAQS nonattainment area, we find the said MVEBs adequate for conformity purpo ses.