[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 175 (Tuesday, September 11, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51747-51758]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-17890]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0533; FRL-8465-8]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Redesignation of the Centre County 8-Hour Ozone
Nonattainment Area to Attainment and Approval of the Area's Maintenance
Plan and 2002 Base Year Inventory
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a redesignation request and State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
(PADEP) is requesting that the Centre County ozone nonattainment area
(State College Area) be redesignated as attainment for the 8-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). EPA is proposing to
approve the ozone redesignation request for State College Area. In
conjunction with its redesignation request, PADEP submitted a SIP
revision consisting of a maintenance plan for State College Area that
provides for continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at
least 10 years after redesignation. EPA is proposing to make a
determination that the State College Area has attained the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, based upon three years of complete, quality-assured ambient air
quality ozone monitoring data for 2004-2006. EPA's proposed approval of
the 8-hour ozone redesignation request is based on its determination
that the State College Area has met the criteria for redesignation to
attainment specified in the Clean Air Act. In addition, PADEP submitted
a 2002 base year inventory for the State College Area which EPA is
proposing to approve as a SIP revision. EPA is also providing
information on the status of its adequacy determination for the motor
vehicle emission budgets
[[Page 51748]]
(MVEBs) that are identified in the State College Area maintenance plan
for purposes of transportation conformity, which EPA is also proposing
to approve. EPA is proposing approval of the redesignation request, and
the maintenance plan and the 2002 base year inventory SIP revisions in
accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before October 11, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2007-0533 by one of the following methods:
A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
B. E-mail: [email protected]
C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0533, Marilyn Powers, Acting Chief, Air
Quality Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2007-0533. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the
Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the
State submittal are available at the Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Protection, Bureau of Air Quality, P.O. Box 8468,
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose Quinto, (215) 814-2182, or by e-
mail at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we'',
``us'', or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
Table of Contents
I. What Are the Actions EPA Is Proposing To Take?
II. What Is the Background for These Proposed Actions?
III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?
IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?
V. What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?
VI. What Is EPA's Analysis of the State's Request?
VII. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and
Identified in the Maintenance Plan for the State College Area
Adequate and Approvable?
VIII. Proposed Action
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What Are the Actions EPA Is Proposing To Take?
On June 12, 2007, PADEP formally submitted a request to redesignate
the State College Area from nonattainment to attainment of the 8-hour
NAAQS for ozone. Concurrently, on June 12, 2007, PADEP submitted a
maintenance plan for the State College Area as a SIP revision to ensure
continued attainment for at least 10 years after redesignation. PADEP
also submitted a 2002 base year inventory as a SIP revision on June 12,
2007. The State College Area is currently designated as a basic 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area. EPA is proposing to determine that the State
College Area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS and that it has met
the requirements for redesignation pursuant to section 107(d)(3)(E) of
the Clean Air Act. EPA is, therefore, proposing to approve the
redesignation request to change the designation of the State College
Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA
is also proposing to approve the State College Area maintenance plan as
a SIP revision, such approval being one of the Clean Air Act criteria
for redesignation to attainment status. The maintenance plan is
designed to ensure continued attainment in the State College Area for
the next ten years. EPA is also proposing to approve the 2002 base year
inventory for the State College Area as a SIP revision. Additionally,
EPA is announcing its action on the adequacy process for the MVEBs
identified in the State College Area maintenance plan, and proposing to
approve the MVEBs identified for volatile organic compounds (VOC) and
nitrogen oxides (NOX) for transportation conformity
purposes.
II. What Is the Background for These Proposed Actions?
A. General
Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources. Rather,
emissions of NOX and VOC react in the presence of sunlight
to form ground-level ozone. The air pollutants NOX and VOC
are referred to as precursors of ozone. The Clean Air Act establishes a
process for air quality management through the attainment and
maintenance of the NAAQS.
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone standard
of 0.08 parts per million (ppm). This new standard is more stringent
than the previous 1-hour ozone standard. EPA designated, as
nonattainment, any area violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the
air quality data for the three years of 2001-2003. These were the most
recent three years of data at the time EPA designated 8-hour areas. The
State College Area was designated as basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment
status in a Federal Register notice signed on April 15, 2004 and
published on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857), based on its exceedance of
the 8-hour health-based standard for ozone during the years 2001-2003.
On April 30, 2004, EPA issued a final rule (69 FR 23951, 23996) to
revoke the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the State
[[Page 51749]]
College Area (as well as most other areas of the country) effective
June 15, 2005. See, 40 CFR 50.9(b); 69 FR at 23966 (April 30, 2004); 70
FR 44470 (August 3, 2005).
However, on December 22, 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit vacated EPA's Phase 1 Implementation Rule
for the 8-hour Ozone Standard. (69 FR 23951, April 30, 2004). South
Coast Air Quality Management Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (DC Cir. 2006).
On June 8, 2007, in South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. v. EPA,
Docket No. 04-1201, in response to several petitions for rehearing, the
DC Circuit clarified that the Phase 1 Rule was vacated only with regard
to those parts of the rule that had been successfully challenged.
Therefore, the Phase 1 Rule provisions related to classifications for
areas currently classified under subpart 2 of Title I, Part D of the
Clean Air Act as 8-hour nonattainment areas, the 8-hour attainment
dates and the timing for emissions reductions needed for attainment of
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS remain effective. The June 8 decision left
intact the Court's rejection of EPA's reasons for implementing the 8-
hour standard in certain nonattainment areas under subpart 1 in lieu of
subpart 2. By limiting the vacatur, the Court let stand EPA's
revocation of the 1-hour standard and those anti-backsliding provisions
of the Phase 1 Rule that had not been successfully challenged. The June
8 decision reaffirmed the December 22, 2006 decision that EPA had
improperly failed to retain measures required for 1-hour nonattainment
areas under the anti-backsliding provisions of the regulations: (1)
Nonattainment area New Source Review (NSR) requirements based on an
area's 1-hour nonattainment classification; (2) Section 185 penalty
fees for 1-hour severe or extreme nonattainment areas; and (3) measures
to be implemented pursuant to section 172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9) of the
Clean Air Act, on the contingency of an area not making reasonable
further progress toward attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or for failure
to attain that NAAQS.
In addition, the June 8 decision clarified that the Court's
reference to conformity requirements for anti-backsliding purposes was
limited to requiring the continued use of 1-hour motor vehicle
emissions budgets until 8-hour budgets were available for 8-hour
conformity determinations, which is already required under EPA's
conformity regulations. The Court thus clarified that 1-hour conformity
determinations are not required for anti-backsliding purposes.
The Court upheld EPA's authority to revoke the 1-hour standard
provided there were adequate anti-backsliding provisions. Elsewhere in
this document, mainly in section VI.B. ``The State College Area Has Met
All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and Part D of the Clean
Air Act and Has Fully Approved SIP under Section 110(k) of the Clean
Air Act,'' EPA discusses its rationale why the decision in South Coast
is not an impediment to redesignating the State College Area to
attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
The Clean Air Act, Title I, Part D, contains two sets of
provisions--subpart 1 and subpart 2--that address planning and control
requirements for nonattainment areas. Subpart 1 (which EPA refers to as
``basic'' nonattainment) contains general, less prescriptive
requirements for nonattainment areas for any pollutant--including
ozone--governed by a NAAQS. Subpart 2 (which EPA refers to as
``classified'' nonattainment) provides more specific requirements for
ozone nonattainment areas. Some 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are
subject only to the provisions of subpart 1. Other areas are also
subject to the provisions of subpart 2. Under EPA's 8-hour ozone
implementation rule, an area was classified under subpart 2 based on
its 8-hour ozone design value (i.e., the 3-year average annual fourth-
highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration), if it had a
1-hour design value at or above 0.121 ppm (the lowest 1-hour design
value in the Clean Air Act for subpart 2 requirements). All other areas
are covered under subpart 1, based upon their 8-hour design values. In
2004, State College Area was designated a basic 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area based upon air quality monitoring data from 2001-
2003, and therefore, is subject to the requirements of subpart 1 of
Part D.
Under 40 CFR part 50, the 8-hour ozone standard is attained when
the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour
average ambient air quality ozone concentrations is less than or equal
to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when rounding is considered). See 69 FR
23857, (April 30, 2004) for further information. Ambient air quality
monitoring data for the 3-year period must meet data completeness
requirements. The data completeness requirements are met when the
average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring data is greater
than 90 percent, and no single year has less than 75 percent data
completeness as determined in Appendix I of 40 CFR part 50. The ozone
monitoring data from the 3-year period of 2004-2006 indicates that the
State College Area has a design value of 0.076 ppm. Therefore, the
ambient ozone data for the State College Area indicates no violations
of the 8-hour ozone standard.
B. The State College Area
The State College Area consists of Centre County, Pennsylvania.
Prior to its designation as an 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, State
College Area was an attainment/unclassifiable area for the 1-hour ozone
nonattainment NAAQS. See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991).
On June 12, 2007, PADEP requested that the State College Area be
redesignated to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. The
redesignation request included 3 years of complete, quality-assured
data for the period of 2004-2006, indicating that the 8-hour NAAQS for
ozone had been achieved in the State College Area. The data satisfies
the Clean Air Act requirements when the 3-year average of the annual
fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration
(commonly referred to as the area's design value) is less than or equal
to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when rounding is considered). Under the
Clean Air Act, a nonattainment area may be redesignated if sufficient
complete, quality-assured data is available to determine that the area
has attained the standard and the area meets the other Clean Air Act
redesignation requirements set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E).
III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?
The Clean Air Act provides the requirements for redesignating a
nonattainment area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of
the Clean Air Act, allows for redesignation, providing that:
(1) EPA determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS;
(2) EPA has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for
the area under section 110(k);
(3) EPA determines that the improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from
implementation of the applicable SIP and applicable Federal air
pollutant control regulations and other permanent and enforceable
reductions;
(4) EPA has fully approved a maintenance plan for the area as
meeting the requirements of section 175A; and
(5) The State containing such area has met all requirements
applicable to the area under section 110 and Part D.
[[Page 51750]]
EPA provided guidance on redesignation in the General Preamble for
the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,
on April 16, 1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented this guidance on
April 28, 1992 (57 FR 18070). EPA has provided further guidance on
processing redesignation requests in the following documents:
``Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value Calculations'',
Memorandum from Bill Laxton, June 18, 1990;
``Maintenance Plans for Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief,
Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, April 30, 1992;
``Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Redesignations,'' Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 1992;
``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas
to Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4, 1992;
``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in
Response to Clean Air Act Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni,
Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;
``Technical Support Documents (TSD's) for Redesignation
Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from
G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17,
1993;
``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas
Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and
Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) On
or After November 15, 1992,'' Memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, September 17,
1993;
Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, Acting Director, Air
Quality Management Division, to Air Division Directors, Regions 1-10,
``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for Ozone and
CO Nonattainment Areas,'' dated November 30, 1993;
``Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for
Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' Memorandum from Mary D.
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14,
1994; and
``Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration,
and Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard,'' Memorandum from John S.
Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, May 10,
1995.
IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?
On June 12, 2007, PADEP requested redesignation of the State
College Area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. On June 12,
2007, PADEP submitted a maintenance plan for the State College Area as
a SIP revision to assure continued attainment at least 10 years after
redesignation. EPA has determined that the State College Area has
attained the standard and has met the requirements for redesignation
set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E). PADEP also submitted a 2002 base
year inventory concurrently with its maintenance plan as a SIP
revision.
V. What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?
Approval of the redesignation request would change the designation
of the State College Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS found at 40 CFR part 81. It would also incorporate
into the Pennsylvania SIP a 2002 base year inventory and a maintenance
plan ensuring continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the
State College Area for the next 10 years. The maintenance plan includes
contingency measures to remedy any future violations of the 8-hour
NAAQS (should they occur), and identifies the MVEBs for NOX
and VOC for transportation conformity purposes for the years 2004, 2009
and 2018. These motor vehicle emissions (2004) and MVEBs (2009 and
2018) are displayed in the following table:
Table 1.--Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in Tons per Day (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year NOX VOC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009.............................................. 12.5 5.4
2018.............................................. 6.0 3.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. What Is EPA's Analysis of the State's Request?
EPA is proposing to determine that State College Area has attained
the 8-hour ozone standard and that all other redesignation criteria
have been met. The following is a description of how PADEP's June 12,
2007 submittal satisfies the requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) of
the Clean Air Act.
A. The State College Area Has Attained the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
EPA is proposing to determine that the State College Area has
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. For ozone, an area may be considered
to be attaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS if there are no violations, as
determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.10 and Appendix I of part 50,
based on three complete and consecutive calendar years of quality-
assured air quality monitoring data. To attain this standard, the
design value, which is the 3-year average of the fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations, measured at each monitor
within the area over each year must not exceed the ozone standard of
0.08 ppm. Based on the rounding convention described in 40 CFR part 50,
Appendix I, the standard is attained if the design value is 0.084 ppm
or below. The data must be collected and quality-assured in accordance
with 40 CFR part 58, and recorded in the Air Quality System (AQS). The
monitors generally should have remained at the same location for the
duration of the monitoring period required for demonstrating
attainment.
In the State College Area, there is one monitor that measures air
quality with respect to ozone. As part of its redesignation request,
Pennsylvania submitted ozone monitoring data for the years 2004-2006
(the most recent three years of data available as of the time of the
redesignation request) for the State College Area. This data has been
quality assured and is recorded in AQS. The fourth-high 8-hour daily
maximum concentrations, along with the three-year average, are
summarized in Table 2.
Table 2.--State College County Nonattainment Area Fourth Highest 8-Hour
Average Values; State College County Monitor, AQS ID 42-027-0100
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual
4th high
Year reading
(ppm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004......................................................... 0.069
2005......................................................... 0.083
2006......................................................... 0.078
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The average for the 3-year period 2004 through 2006 is 0.076 ppm.
The air quality data for 2004-2006 show that the State College Area
has attained the standard with a design value of 0.076 ppm. The data
collected at the State College Area monitor satisfies the Clean Air Act
requirement that the 3-year average of the annual
[[Page 51751]]
fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration is less
than or equal to 0.08 ppm. PADEP's request for redesignation for the
State College Area indicates that the data was quality assured in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58. PADEP uses the AQS as the permanent
database to maintain its data and quality assures the data transfers
and content for accuracy. In addition, as discussed below with respect
to the maintenance plan, PADEP has committed to continue monitoring in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58. In summary, EPA has determined that the
data submitted by Pennsylvania and taken from AQS indicates that State
College Area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
B. The State College Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under
Section 110 and Part D of the Clean Air Act and Has a Fully Approved
SIP Under Section 110(k) of the Clean Air Act
EPA has determined that the State College Area has met all SIP
requirements applicable for purposes of this redesignation under
section 110 of the Clean Air Act (General SIP Requirements) and that it
meets all applicable SIP requirements under Part D of Title I of the
Clean Air Act, in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition,
EPA has determined that the SIP is fully approved with respect to all
requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation in accordance
with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these proposed determinations,
EPA ascertained what requirements are applicable to the area and
determined that the applicable portions of the SIP meeting these
requirements are fully approved under section 110(k) of the Clean Air
Act. We note that SIPs must be fully approved only with respect to
applicable requirements.
The September 4, 1992 Calcagni memorandum (``Procedures for
Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' Memorandum
from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division,
September 4, 1992) describes EPA's interpretation of section
107(d)(3)(E) with respect to the timing of applicable requirements.
Under this interpretation, to qualify for redesignation, States
requesting redesignation to attainment must meet only the relevant
Clean Air Act requirements that come due prior to the submittal of a
complete redesignation request. See also, Michael Shapiro memorandum,
September 17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66, (March 7, 1995)
(redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor). Applicable requirements of the
Clean Air Act that come due subsequent to the area's submittal of a
complete redesignation request remain applicable until a redesignation
is approved, but are not required as a prerequisite to redesignation.
Section 175A(c) of the Clean Air Act. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537
(7th Cir. 2004). See also, 68 FR 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003)
(redesignation of St. Louis).
This action also sets forth EPA's views on the potential effect of
the Court's rulings on this proposed redesignation action. For the
reasons set forth below, EPA does not believe that the Court's rulings
alter any requirements relevant to this redesignation action so as to
preclude redesignation, and do not prevent EPA from proposing or
ultimately finalizing this redesignation.
EPA believes that the Court's December 22, 2006 and June 8, 2007
decisions impose no impediment to moving forward with redesignation of
this area to attainment, because even in light of the Court's
decisions, redesignation is appropriate under the relevant
redesignation provisions of the Clean Air Act and longstanding policies
regarding redesignation requests.
1. Section 110 General SIP Requirements
Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the Clean Air Act delineates the
general requirements for a SIP, which include enforceable emissions
limitations and other control measures, means, or techniques,
provisions for the establishment and operation of appropriate devices
necessary to collect data on ambient air quality, and programs to
enforce the limitations. The general SIP elements and requirements set
forth in section 110(a)(2) include, but are not limited to, the
following:
Submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the State
after reasonable public notice and hearing;
Provisions for establishment and operation of appropriate
procedures needed to monitor ambient air quality;
Implementation of a source permit program; provisions for
the implementation of Part C requirement (Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD));
Provisions for the implementation of Part D requirements
for New Source Review (NSR) permit programs;
Provisions for air pollution modeling; and
Provisions for public and local agency participation in
planning and emission control rule development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to
prevent sources in a State from significantly contributing to air
quality problems in another State. To implement this provision, EPA has
required certain States to establish programs to address transport of
air pollutants in accordance with the NOX SIP Call, October
27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), amendments to the NOX SIP Call, May
14, 1999 (64 FR 26298) and March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11222), and the Clean
Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162). However, the
section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a State are not linked with a
particular nonattainment area's designation and classification in that
State. EPA believes that the requirements linked with a particular
nonattainment area's designation and classifications are the relevant
measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. The
transport SIP submittal requirements, where applicable, continue to
apply to a State regardless of the designation of any one particular
area in the State.
Thus, we do not believe that these requirements are applicable
requirements for purposes of redesignation. In addition, EPA believes
that the other section 110 elements not connected with nonattainment
plan submissions and not linked with an area's attainment status are
not applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation. The State
College Area will still be subject to these requirements after it is
redesignated. The section 110 and Part D requirements, which are linked
with a particular area's designation and classification, are the
relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request.
This policy is consistent with EPA's existing policy on applicability
of conformity (i.e., for redesignations) and oxygenated fuels
requirement. See, Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final rulemakings
(61 FR 53174-53176, October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24816, May 7, 1997);
Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio, final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7,
1996); and Tampa, Florida, final rulemaking (60 FR 62748, December 7,
1995). See also, the discussion on this issue in the Cincinnati
redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 2000), and in the Pittsburgh
redesignation (66 FR 50399, October 19, 2001). Similarly, with respect
to the NOX SIP Call rules, EPA noted in its Phase 1 Final
Rule to Implement the 8-hour Ozone NAAQS, that the NOX SIP
Call rules are not ``an `applicable requirement' for purposes of
section 110(l) because the NOX rules apply regardless of an
area's attainment or nonattainment status for the 8-hour (or the 1-
hour) NAAQS.'' 69 FR 23951, 23983 (April 30, 2004).
EPA believes that section 110 elements not linked to the area's
[[Page 51752]]
nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation.
Any section 110 requirements that are linked to the Part D requirements
for 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are not yet due, because, as we
explain later in this notice, no Part D requirements applicable for
purposes of redesignation under the 8-hour standard became due prior to
submission of the redesignation request.
Because the Pennsylvania SIP satisfies all of the applicable
general SIP elements and requirements set forth in section 110(a)(2),
EPA concludes that Pennsylvania has satisfied the criterion of section
107(d)(3)(E) regarding section 110 of the Clean Air Act.
2. Part D Nonattainment Area Requirements Under the 1-Hour and 8-Hour
Standards
The State College Area was designated a basic nonattainment area
for the 8-hour ozone standard. Sections 172-176 of the Clean Air Act,
found in subpart 1 of Part D, set forth the basic nonattainment
requirements for all nonattainment areas. As discussed previously,
because the State College Area was designated unclassifiable/attainment
under the 1-hour standard, and was never designated nonattainment for
the 1-hour standard, there are no outstanding 1-hour nonattainment area
requirements it would be required to meet. Thus, we find that the
Court's ruling does not result in any additional 1-hour requirements
for purposes of redesignation.
With respect to the 8-hour standard, EPA notes that the Court's
ruling rejected EPA's reasons for classifying areas under subpart 1 for
the 8-hour standard, and remanded that matter to the Agency.
Consequently, it is possible that this area could, during a remand to
EPA, be reclassified under subpart 2. Although any future decision by
EPA to classify this under subpart 2 might trigger additional future
requirements for the area, EPA believes that this does not mean that
redesignation of the area cannot now go forward. This belief is based
upon (1) EPA's longstanding policy of evaluating requirements in
accordance with the requirements due at the time the request is
submitted; and (2) consideration of the inequity of applying
retroactively any requirements that might in the future be applied.
At the time the redesignation request was submitted, the State
College Area was classified under subpart 1 and was obligated to meet
subpart 1 requirements. Under EPA's longstanding interpretation of
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act, to qualify for
redesignation, states requesting redesignation to attainment must meet
only the relevant SIP requirements that came due prior to the submittal
of a complete redesignation request. See September 4, 1992 Calcagni
memorandum (``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas
to Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division). See also, Michael Shapiro Memorandum, September
17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66 (March 7, 1995) (Redesignation of
Detroit-Ann Arbor); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004)
(which upheld this interpretation); 68 FR 25418, 25424, 25427 (May 12,
2003) (redesignation of St. Louis).
Moreover, it would be inequitable to retroactively apply any new
SIP requirements that were not applicable at the time the request was
submitted. The DC Circuit recognized the inequity in such retroactive
rulemaking. See, Sierra Club v. Whitman, 285 F. 3d 63 (DC Cir. 2002),
in which the DC Circuit upheld a District Court's ruling refusing to
make retroactive an EPA determination of nonattainment that was past
the statutory due date. Such a determination would have resulted in the
imposition of additional requirements on the area. The Court stated:
``Although EPA failed to make the nonattainment determination within
the statutory time frame, Sierra Club's proposed solution only makes
the situation worse. Retroactive relief would likely impose large costs
on the States, which would face fines and suits for not implementing
air pollution prevention plan in 1997, even though they were not on
notice at the time.'' Id. at 68. Similarly, here it would be unfair to
penalize the area by applying to it for purposes of redesignation
additional SIP requirements under subpart 2 that were not in effect at
the time it submitted its redesignation request.
With respect to the 8-hour standard, EPA proposes to determine that
Pennsylvania's SIP meets all applicable SIP requirements under Part D
of the Clean Air Act, because no 8-hour ozone standard Part D
requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation became due prior
to submission of the redesignation request for the State College Area.
Because the Commonwealth submitted a complete redesignation request for
the State College Area prior to the deadline for any submissions
required under the 8-hour standard, we have determined that the Part D
requirements do not apply to the State College Area for the purposes of
redesignation.
In addition to the fact that no Part D requirements applicable
under the 8-hour standard became due prior to submission of the
redesignation request, EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the
general conformity and NSR requirements of Part D as not requiring
approval prior to redesignation.
With respect to section 176, Conformity Requirements, section
176(c) of the Clean Air Act requires States to establish criteria and
procedures to ensure that Federally supported or funded projects
conform to the air quality planning goals in the applicable SIP. The
requirement to determine conformity applies to transportation plans,
programs, and projects developed, funded or approved under Title 23
U.S.C. and the Federal Transit Act (``transportation conformity'') as
well as to all other Federally supported or funded projects (``general
conformity''). State conformity revisions must be consistent with
Federal conformity regulations relating to consultation, enforcement
and enforceability that the Clean Air Act required EPA to promulgate.
EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the conformity SIP
requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating the
redesignation request under section 107(d) since State conformity rules
are still required after redesignation and Federal conformity rules
apply where State rules have not been approved. See, Wall v. EPA, 265
F. 3d 426, 438-440 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding this interpretation. See
also, 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995).
In the case of the State College Area, EPA has also determined that
before being redesignated, the State College Area need not comply with
the requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to redesignation.
EPA has also determined that areas being redesignated need not comply
with the requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to
redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the
standard without Part D NSR in effect. The rationale for this position
is described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled, ``Part D NSR
Requirements of Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.''
Normally, State's Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program
will become effective in the area immediately upon redesignation to
attainment. See the more detailed explanations in the following
redesignation rulemakings: Detroit, MI (60 FR 12467-12468, March 7,
1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorrain, OH
[[Page 51753]]
(61 FR 20458, 20469-20470, May 7, 1996); Louisville, KY (66 FR 53665,
53669, October 23, 2001); Grand Rapids, MI (61 FR 31831, 31836-31837,
June 21, 1996). In the case of the State College Area, the Chapter 127
Part D NSR regulations in the Pennsylvania SIP (codified at 40 CFR
52.2020(c)(1)) explicitly apply the requirements for NSR in section 184
of the Clean Air Act to ozone attainment areas within the ozone
transport region (OTR). The OTR NSR requirements are more stringent
than that required for a marginal or basic ozone nonattainment area. On
October 19, 2001 (66 FR 53094), EPA fully approved Pennsylvania's NSR
SIP revision consisting of Pennsylvania's Chapter 127 Part D NSR
regulations that cover the State College Area.
All areas in the OTR, both attainment and nonattainment, are
subject to additional control requirements under section 184 for the
purpose of reducing interstate transport of emissions that may
contribute to downwind ozone nonattainment. The section 184
requirements include reasonably Available control technology (RACT),
NSR, enhanced vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M), and Stage II
vapor recovery or a comparable measure.
EPA has also interpreted the section 184 OTR requirements,
including the NSR program, as not being applicable for purposes of
redesignation. The rationale for this is based on two considerations.
First, the requirement to submit SIP revisions for the section 184
requirements continues to apply to areas in the OTR after redesignation
to attainment. Therefore, the State remains obligated to have NSR, as
well as RACT, and I/M programs even after redesignation. Second, the
section 184 control measures are region-wide requirements and do not
apply to the State College Area by virtue of the area's designation and
classification. See, 61 FR 53174, 53175-53176 (October 10, 1996) and 62
FR 24826, 24830-24832 (May 7, 1997).
In the case of the State College Area, which is located in the OTR,
nonattainment NSR will be applicable after redesignation. As discussed
previously, EPA fully approved Pennsylvania's NSR SIP revision which
applies the requirements for NSR of section 184 of the Clean Air Act to
attainment areas within the OTR.
3. The State College Area Has a Fully Approved SIP for the Purposes of
Redesignation
EPA has fully approved the Pennsylvania SIP for the purposes of
redesignation. EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a
redesignation request. Calcagni Memo, p. 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania
Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F. 3d 984, 989-90 (6th Cir. 1998); Wall
v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), plus any additional measures it
may approve in conjunction with a redesignation action. See also, 68 FR
at 25425 (May 12, 2003) and citations therein.
The State College Area was a 1-hour attainment/unclassifiable area
at the time of its designation as a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment
area on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857). Because the State College Area
was a 1-hour attainment/unclassifiable area, there are no previous Part
D SIP submittal requirements. Also, no Part D submittal requirements
have come due prior to the submittal of the 8-hour maintenance plan for
the area. Therefore, all Part D submittal requirements have been
fulfilled. Because there are no outstanding SIP submission requirements
applicable for the purposes of redesignation of the State College Area,
the applicable implementation plan satisfies all pertinent SIP
requirements. As indicated previously, EPA believes that the section
110 elements not connected with Part D nonattainment plan submissions
and not linked to the area's nonattainment status are not applicable
requirements for purposes of redesignation. EPA also believes that no
8-hour Part D requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation
have yet become due for the State College Area, and therefore they need
not be approved into the SIP prior to redesignation.
C. The Air Quality Improvement in the State College Area Is Due to
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions Resulting From
Implementation of the SIP and Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control
Regulations and Other Permanent and Enforceable Reductions
EPA believes that the Commonwealth has demonstrated that the
observed air quality improvement in the State College Area is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from
implementation of the SIP, Federal measures, and other State-adopted
measures. Emissions reductions attributable to these rules are shown in
Table 3.
Table 3.--Total VOC and NOX Emissions for 2002 and 2004 in Tons per Day (tpd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Point Area Nonroad Mobile Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 2002................................................ 0.1 6.8 3.1 8.1 18.1
Year 2004................................................ 0.1 6.7 3.1 7.0 16.9
Diff. (02-04)............................................ 0.0 -0.1 0.0 -1.1 -1.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 2002................................................ 5.8 0.8 4.0 18.8 29.4
Year 2004................................................ 3.8 0.9 3.8 16.8 25.3
Diff. (02-04)............................................ -2.0 0.1 -0.2 -2.0 -4.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Between 2002 and 2004, VOC emissions were reduced by 1.2 tpd, and
NOX emissions were reduced by 4.1 tpd. These reductions and
anticipated future reductions are due to the following permanent and
enforceable measures implemented or in the process of being implemented
in the State College Area:
1. Stationary Point Sources
Federal NOX SIP Call (66 FR 43795, August 21, 2001).
2. Stationary Area Sources
Solvent Cleaning (68 FR 2206, January 16, 2003).
Portable Fuel Containers (69 FR 70893, December 8, 2004).
3. Highway Vehicle Sources
Federal Motor Vehicle Control Programs (FMVCP).
--Tier 1 (56 FR 25724, June 5, 1991)
--Tier 2 (65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000)
Heavy Duty Engines and Vehicles Standards (62 FR 54694, October 21,
1997 and 65 FR 59896, October 6, 2000).
National Low Emission Vehicle
[[Page 51754]]
(NLEV) (64 FR 72564, December 28, 1999).
Vehicle Safety Inspection Program (70 FR 58313, October 6, 2005).
4. Nonroad Sources
Nonroad Diesel Engine and Fuel (69 FR 38958, June 29, 2004).
EPA believes that permanent and enforceable emissions reductions are
the cause of the long-term improvement in ozone levels and are the
cause of the area achieving attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard.
D. The State College Area Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan
Pursuant to Section 175A of the Clean Air Act
In conjunction with its request to redesignate the State College
Area to attainment status, Pennsylvania submitted a SIP revision to
provide for maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the State College
Area for at least 10 years after redesignation. Pennsylvania is
requesting that EPA approve this SIP revision as meeting the
requirement of section 175A of the Clean Air Act. Once approved, the
maintenance plan for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS will ensure that the SIP
for the State College Area meets the requirements of the Clean Air Act
regarding maintenance of the applicable 8-hour ozone standard.
What is required in a maintenance plan?
Section 175A of the Clean Air Act sets forth the elements of a
maintenance plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to
attainment. Under section 175A, the plan must demonstrate continued
attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years after approval
of a redesignation of an area to attainment. Eight years after the
redesignation, the State must submit a revised maintenance plan
demonstrating that attainment will continue to be maintained for the
next 10-year period following the initial 10-year period. To address
the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must
contain such contingency measures, with a schedule for implementation,
as EPA deems necessary to assure prompt correction of any future 8-hour
ozone violations. Section 175A of the Clean Air Act sets forth the
elements of a maintenance plan for areas seeking redesignation from
nonattainment to attainment. The Calcagni memo provides additional
guidance on the content of a maintenance plan. An ozone maintenance
plan should address the following provisions:
(1) An attainment emissions inventory;
(2) A maintenance demonstration;
(3) A monitoring network;
(4) Verification of continued attainment; and
(5) A contingency plan.
Analysis of the State College Area Maintenance Plan
(a) Attainment Inventory--An attainment inventory includes the
emissions during the time period associated with the monitoring data
showing attainment. An attainment year of 2004 was used for the State
College Area since it is a reasonable year within the 3-year block of
2002-2004 and accounts for reductions attributable to implementation of
the Clean Air Act requirements to date. The 2004 inventory is
consistent with EPA guidance and is based on actual ``typical summer
day'' emissions of VOC and NOX during 2004 and consists of a
list of sources and their associated emissions.
PADEP prepared comprehensive VOC and NOX emissions
inventories for the State College Area, including point, area, mobile
on-road, and mobile non-road sources for a base year of 2002.
To develop the NOX and VOC base year emissions
inventories, PADEP used the following approaches and sources of data:
(i) Point source emissions--Pennsylvania requires owners and
operators of larger facilities to submit annual production figures and
emission calculations each year. Throughput data are multiplied by
emission factors from Factor Information Retrieval (FIRE) Data System
and EPA's publication series AP-42 and are based on Source
Classification Code (SCC). Each process has at least one SCC assigned
to it. If the owners and operators of facilities provide more accurate
emission data based upon other factors, these emission estimates
supersede those calculated using SCC codes.
(ii) Area source emissions--Area source emissions are generally
estimated by multiplying an emission factor by some known indicator or
collective activity for each area source category at the county level.
Pennsylvania estimates emissions from area sources using emission
factors and SCC codes in a method similar to that used for stationary
point sources. Emission factors may also be derived from research and
guidance documents if those documents are more accurate than FIRE and
AP-42 factors. Throughput estimates are derived from county-level
activity data, by apportioning national and statewide activity data to
counties, from census numbers, and from county employee numbers. County
employee numbers are based upon North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) codes to establish that those numbers are specific to
the industry covered.
(iii) On-road mobile sources--PADEP employs an emissions estimation
methodology that uses current EPA-approved highway vehicle emission
model, MOBILE 6.2, to estimate highway vehicle emissions. The State
College Area highway vehicle emissions in 2004 were estimated using
MOBILE 6.2 and PENNDOT estimates of vehicles miles traveled (VMT) by
vehicle type and roadway type.
(iv) Mobile nonroad emissions--The 2002 emissions for the majority
of nonroad emission source categories were estimated using the EPA
NONROAD 2005 model. The NONROAD model estimates emissions for diesel,
gasoline, liquefied petroleum gasoline, and compressed natural gas-
fueled nonroad equipment types and includes growth factors. The NONROAD
model does not estimate emissions from aircraft or locomotives. For
2002 locomotive emissions, PADEP projected emissions from a 1999 survey
using national fuel information and EPA emission and conversion
factors. There are no commercial aircraft operations in the State
College Area. For 2002 aircraft emissions, PADEP estimated emissions
using small aircraft operation statistics from http://www.airnav.com,
and emission factors and operational characteristics in the EPA-
approved model, Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS).
The 2004 attainment year VOC and NOX emissions for the
State College Area are summarized along with the 2009 and 2018
projected emissions for this area in Tables 4 and 5, which cover the
demonstration of maintenance for this area. EPA has concluded that
Pennsylvania has adequately derived and documented the 2004 attainment
year VOC and NOX emissions for this area.
(b) Maintenance Demonstration--On June 12, 2007, PADEP submitted a
SIP revision to supplement its June 12, 2007 redesignation request. The
submittal by PADEP consists of the maintenance plan as required by
section 175A of the Clean Air Act. The State College Area plan shows
maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS by demonstrating that current and
future emissions of VOC and NOX remain at or below the
attainment year 2004 emissions levels throughout the State College Area
through the year 2018. A maintenance demonstration need not be based on
modeling. See, Wall v. EPA, supra; Sierra Club v. EPA, supra. See also,
66 FR at 53099-53100; 68 FR at 25430-25432.
[[Page 51755]]
Tables 4 and 5 specify the VOC and NOX emissions for the
State College Area for 2004, 2009, and 2018. PADEP chose 2009 as an
interim year in the 10-year maintenance demonstration period to
demonstrate that the VOC and NOX emissions are not projected
to increase above the 2004 attainment level during the time of the 10-
year maintenance period.
Table 4.--Total VOC Emissions for 2004-2018 (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004 VOC 2009 VOC 2018 VOC
Source category emissions emissions emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobile*.......................... 7.0 5.4 3.7
Nonroad.......................... 3.1 2.7 2.1
Area............................. 6.7 6.4 6.7
Point............................ 0.1 0.1 0.1
--------------------------------------
Total........................ 16.9 14.6 12.6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Includes safety margin identified in the motor vehicle emission
budgets for transportation conformity.
Table 5.--Total NOX Emissions 2004-2018 (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004 NOX 2009 NOX 2018 NOX
Source category emissions emissions emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobile*.......................... 16.8 12.5 6.0
Nonroad.......................... 3.8 3.2 1.9
Area............................. 0.9 0.9 0.9
Point............................ 3.8 6.7 7.7
--------------------------------------
Total........................ 25.3 23.3 16.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Includes safety margin identified in the motor vehicle emission
budgets for transportation conformity.
The following programs are either effective or due to become effective
and will further contribute to the maintenance demonstration of the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS:
1. Pennsylvania's Portable Fuel Containers (69 FR 70893, December
8, 2004).
2. Pennsylvania's Consumer Products (69 FR 70895, December 8,
2004).
3. Pennsylvania's Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM)
Coatings (69 FR 68080, November 23, 2004).
4. Federal NOX SIP Call (66 FR 43795, August 21, 2001).
5. Federal Clean Air Interstate Rule (71 FR 25328, April 28, 2006).
6. FMVCP for passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks and cleaner
gasoline (2009 and 2018 fleet)--Tier 1 and Tier 2 (56 FR 25724, June 5,
1991 and 65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000).
7. NLEV Program, which includes the Pennsylvania's Clean Vehicle
Program for passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks (69 FR 72564,
December 28, 1999)--proposed amendments to move the implementation to
model year (MY) 2008.
8. Heavy duty diesel on-road (2004/2007) and low-sulfur on-road
(2006) (66 FR 5002, January 18, 2001).
9. Non-road emissions standards (2008) and off-road diesel fuel
(2007/2010) (69 FR 38958, June 29, 2004).
Based upon the comparison of the projected emissions and the
attainment year emissions along with the additional measures, EPA
concludes that PADEP has successfully demonstrated that the 8-hour
ozone standard should be maintained in the State College Area.
(c) Monitoring Network--There is currently one monitor measuring
ozone in the State College Area. Pennsylvania will continue to operate
its current air quality monitor in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.
(d) Verification of Continued Attainment--The Commonwealth will
track the attainment status of the ozone NAAQS in the State College
Area by reviewing air quality and emissions during the maintenance
period. The Commonwealth will perform an annual evaluation of two key
factors, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) data and emissions reported from
stationary sources, and compare them to the assumptions about these
factors used in the maintenance plan. The Commonwealth will also
evaluate the periodic (every three years) emission inventories prepared
under EPA's Consolidated Emission Reporting Regulation (40 CFR part 51,
Subpart A) to see if the area exceeds the attainment year inventory
(2004) by more than 10 percent. Based on these evaluations, the
Commonwealth will consider whether any further emission control
measures should be implemented.
(e) The Maintenance Plan's Contingency Measures--The contingency
plan provisions are designed to promptly correct a violation of the
NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. Section 175A of the Clean Air
Act requires that a maintenance plan include such contingency measures
as EPA deems necessary to ensure that the State will promptly correct a
violation of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The maintenance
plan should identify the events that would ``trigger'' the adoption and
implementation of a contingency measure(s), the contingency measure(s)
that would be adopted and implemented, and the schedule indicating the
time frame by which the state would adopt and implement the measure(s).
The ability of the State College Area to stay in compliance with
the 8-hour ozone standard after redesignation depends upon VOC and
NOX emissions in the area remaining at or below 2004 levels.
The Commonwealth's maintenance plan projects VOC and NOX
emissions to decrease and stay below 2004 levels through the year 2018.
The Commonwealth's maintenance plan outlines the procedures for the
adoption and implementation of contingency measures to further reduce
emissions should a violation occur.
Contingency measures will be considered if for two consecutive
years the fourth highest eight-hour ozone concentrations at the State
College Area monitor are above 84 ppb. If this trigger point occurs,
the Commonwealth will
[[Page 51756]]
evaluate whether additional local emission control measures should be
implemented in order to prevent a violation of the air quality
standard. PADEP will analyze the conditions leading to the excessive
ozone levels and evaluate what measures might be most effective in
correcting the excessive ozone levels. PADEP will also analyze the
potential emissions effect of Federal, State and local measure that
have been adopted but not yet implemented at the time of excessive
ozone levels occurred. PADEP will then begin the process of
implementing any selected measures.
Contingency measures will be considered in the event that a
violation of the 8-hour ozone standard occurs at the State College
County, Pennsylvania monitor. In the event of a violation of the 8-hour
ozone standard, contingency measures will be adopted in order to return
the area to attainment with the standard. Contingency measures to be
considered for the State College Area will include, but not limited to
the following:
Non-regulatory measures:
--Voluntary diesel engine ``chip reflash''--installation software to
correct the defeat device option on certain heavy duty diesel engines.
--Diesel retrofit, including replacement, repowering or alternative
fuel use, for public or private local onroad or offroad fleets.
--Idling reduction technology for Class 2 yard locomotives.
--Idling reduction technologies or strategies for truck stops,
warehouses and other freight-handling facilities.
--Accelerated turnover of lawn and garden equipment, especially
commercial equipment, including promotion of electric equipment.
--Additional promotion of alternative fuel (e.g., biodiesel) for home
heating and agricultural use.
Regulatory measures:
--Additional controls on consumer products.
--Additional control on portable fuel containers.
The plan lays out a process to have any regulatory contingency measures
in effect within 19 months of the trigger. The plan also lays out a
process to implement the non-regulatory contingency measures within 12-
24 months of the trigger.
VII. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and Identified
in the Maintenance Plan for the State College Area Adequate and
Approvable?
A. What Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets?
Under the Clean Air Act, States are required to submit, at various
times, control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans in ozone areas.
These control strategy SIPs (i.e. RFP SIPs and attainment demonstration
SIPs) and maintenance plans identify and establish MVEBs for certain
criteria pollutants and/or their precursors to address pollution from
on-road mobile sources. Pursuant to 40 CFR part 93 and Sec. 51.112,
MVEBs must be established in an ozone maintenance plan. A MVEB is the
portion of the total allowable emissions that is allocated to highway
and transit vehicle use and emissions. A MVEB serves as a ceiling on
emissions from an area's planned transportation system. The MVEB
concept is further explained in the preamble to the November 24, 1993,
transportation conformity rule (58 FR 62188). The preamble also
describes how to establish and revise the MVEBs in control strategy
SIPs and maintenance plans.
Under section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act, new transportation
projects, such as the construction of new highways, must ``conform'' to
(i.e., be consistent with) the part of the State's air quality plan
that addresses pollution from cars and trucks. ``Conformity'' to the
SIP means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality
violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of
or reasonable progress towards the NAAQS. If a transportation plan does
not ``conform,'' most new projects that would expand the capacity of
roadways cannot go forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth EPA
policy, criteria, and procedures for demonstrating and ensuring
conformity of such transportation activities to a SIP.
When reviewing submitted ``control strategy'' SIPs or maintenance
plans containing MVEBs, EPA must affirmatively find the MVEB budget
contained therein ``adequate'' for use in determining transportation
conformity. After EPA affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB is
adequate for transportation conformity purposes, that MVEB can be used
by State and Federal agencies in determining whether proposed
transportation projects ``conform'' to the SIP as required by section
176(c) of the Clean Air Act. EPA's substantive criteria for determining
``adequacy'' of a MVEB are set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4).
EPA's process for determining ``adequacy'' consists of three basic
steps: public notification of a SIP submission, a public comment
period, and EPA's adequacy finding. This process for determining the
adequacy of submitted SIP MVEBs was initially outlined in EPA's May 14,
1999 guidance, ``Conformity Guidance on Implementation of March 2,
1999, Conformity Court Decision.'' This guidance was finalized in the
Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for the ``New 8-Hour Ozone
and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Miscellaneous
Revisions for Existing Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule
Amendments--Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Change'' on
July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). EPA consults this guidance and follows this
rulemaking in making its adequacy determinations.
The MVEBs for the State College Area are listed in Table 1 of this
document for the 2004, 2009, and 2018 years and are the projected
emissions for the on-road mobile sources plus any portion of the safety
margin allocated to the MVEBs. These emission budgets, when approved by
EPA, must be used for transportation conformity determinations.
B. What Is a Safety Margin?
A ``safety margin'' is the difference between the attainment level
of emissions (from all sources) and the projected level of emissions
(from all sources) in the maintenance plan. The attainment level of
emissions is the level of emissions during one of the years in which
the area met the NAAQS. The following example is for the 2018 safety
margin: The State College Area first attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
during the 2002 to 2004 time period. The Commonwealth used 2004 as the
year to determine attainment levels of emissions for the State College
Area.
The total emissions from point, area, mobile on-road, and mobile
non-road sources in 2004 equaled 16.9 tpd of VOC and 25.3 tpd of
NOX. PADEP projected emissions out to the year 2018 and
projected a total of 12.6 tpd of VOC and 16.5 tpd of NOX
from all sources in the State College Area. The safety margin for the
State College Area for 2018 would be the difference between these
amounts, or 4.3 tpd of VOC and 8.8 tpd of NOX. The emissions
up to the level of the attainment year including the safety margins are
projected to maintain the area's air quality consistent with the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. The
[[Page 51757]]
safety margin is the extra emissions reduction below the attainment
levels that can be allocated for emissions by various sources as long
as the total emission levels are maintained at or below the attainment
levels. Table 6 shows the safety margins for the 2009 and 2018 years.
Table 6.--2009 and 2018 Safety Margins for the State College Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC NOX
Inventory year emissions emissions
(tpd) (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004 Attainment............................... 16.9 25.3
2009 Interim.................................. 14.6 23.3
2009 Safety Margin............................ 2.3 2.0
2004 Attainment............................... 16.9 25.3
2018 Final.................................... 12.6 16.5
2018 Safety Margin............................ 4.3 8.8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PADEP allocated 0.4 tpd NOX and 0.3 tpd VOC to the 2009
interim VOC projected on-road mobile source emissions projection and
the 2009 interim NOX projected on-road mobile source
emissions projection to arrive at the 2009 MVEBs. For the 2018 MVEBs
the PADEP allocated 0.5 tpd NOX and 0.4 tpd VOC from the
2018 safety margins to arrive at the 2018 MVEBs. Once allocated to the
mobile source budgets these portions of the safety margins are no
longer available, and may no longer be allocated to any other source
category. Table 7 shows the final 2009 and 2018 MVEBs for the State
College Area.
Table 7.--2009 and 2018 Final MVEBs for the State College Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC emissions NOX emissions
Inventory year (tpd) (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009 projected on-road mobile source 5.1 12.1
projected emissions..................
2009 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs. 0.3 0.4
2009 MVEBs............................ 5.4 12.5
2018 projected on-road mobile source 3.3 5.5
projected emissions..................
2018 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs. 0.4 0.5
2018 MVEBs............................ 3.7 6.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Why Are the MVEBs Approvable?
The 2004, 2009 and 2018 MVEBs for the State College Area are
approvable because the MVEBs for NOX and VOC, including the
allocated safety margins, continue to maintain the total emissions at
or below the attainment year inventory levels as required by the
transportation conformity regulations.
D. What Is the Adequacy and Approval Process for the MVEBs in the State
College Area Maintenance Plan?
The MVEBs for the State College Area maintenance plan are being
posted to EPA's conformity Web site concurrent with this proposal. The
public comment period will end at the same time as the public comment
period for this proposed rule. In this case, EPA is concurrently
processing the action on the maintenance plan and the adequacy process
for the MVEBs contained therein. In this proposed rule, EPA is
proposing to find the MVEBs adequate and also proposing to approve the
MVEBs as part of the maintenance plan. The MVEBs cannot be used for
transportation conformity until the maintenance plan update and
associated MVEBs are approved in a final Federal Register notice, or
EPA otherwise finds the budgets adequate in a separate action following
the comment period.
If EPA receives adverse written comments with respect to the
proposed approval of the State College Area MVEBs, or any other aspect
of our proposed approval of this updated maintenance plan, we will
respond to the comments on the MVEBs in our final action or proceed
with the adequacy process as a separate action. Our action on the State
College Area MVEBs will also be announced on EPA's conformity Web site:
http://www.epa.gov.otaq/stateresources/transconf/index.htm (once there,
click on ``Adequacy Review of SIP Submissions'').
VIII. Proposed Actions
EPA is proposing to determine that the State College Area has
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve the
Commonwealth's June 12, 2007 request for the State College Area to be
redesignated to attainment of the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone. EPA has
evaluated Pennsylvania's redesignation request and determined that it
meets the redesignation criteria set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of
the Clean Air Act. EPA believes that the redesignation request and
monitoring data demonstrate that the area has attained the 8-hour ozone
standard. The final approval of this redesignation request would change
the designation of the State College Area from nonattainment to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. EPA is also proposing to
approve the associated maintenance plan and the 2002 base year
inventory for State College Area, submitted on June 12, 2007, as
revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP. EPA is proposing to approve the
maintenance plan for the State College Area because it meets the
requirements of section 175A as described previously in this notice.
EPA is also proposing to approve the MVEBs submitted by Pennsylvania
for the State College Area in conjunction with its redesignation
request. EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in
this document. These comments will be considered before taking final
action.
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory
[[Page 51758]]
action'' and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject
to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001)). This action merely proposes to approve state law as
meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. Redesignation of an area to
attainment under section 107(d)(3)(e) of the Clean Air Act does not
impose any new requirements on small entities. Redesignation is an
action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not
impose any new regulatory requirements on sources. Redesignation of an
area to attainment under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act does
not impose any new requirements on small entities. Redesignation is an
action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not
impose any new regulatory requirements on sources. Accordingly, the
Administrator certifies that this proposed rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule proposes to approve pre-existing requirements under state law
and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that
required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). Because this
action affects the status of a geographical area, does not impose any
new requirements on sources, or allows the state to avoid adopting or
implementing other requirements, this proposed rule also does not have
a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified
in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it
merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a Federal
requirement, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This
proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it approves a state rule implementing a
Federal standard.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission; to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Redesignation is an
action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not
impose any new requirements on sources. Thus, the requirements of
section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required by section 3 of
Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing this
proposed rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting
errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a
clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied with
Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the
takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney
General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and
Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the executive order.
This rule proposing to approve the redesignation of the State
College Area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the associated
maintenance plan, the 2002 base year inventory, and the MVEBs
identified in the maintenance plan, does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: August 30, 2007.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. E7-17890 Filed 9-10-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P