[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 185 (Tuesday, September 25, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54390-54402]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-18844]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0605; FRL-8473-2]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Redesignation of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 8-Hour Ozone
Nonattainment Area to Attainment and Approval of the 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) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
(PADEP) is requesting that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre ozone
nonattainment area (``Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area'' or ``Area'') be
redesignated as attainment for the 8-hour ozone national ambient air
quality standard (NAAQS). The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area is comprised
of Lackawanna, Luzerne, Monroe and Wyoming Counties. EPA is proposing
to approve the ozone redesignation request for the Scranton/Wilkes-
Barre Area. In conjunction with its redesignation request, the
Commonwealth submitted a SIP revision consisting of a maintenance plan
for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, based
upon three years of complete, quality-assured ambient air quality
monitoring data for 2004-2006. EPA's proposed approval of the 8-hour
ozone redesignation request is based on its determination that the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area has met the criteria for redesignation to
attainment specified in the Clean Air Act. In addition, the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has also submitted a 2002 base-year
inventory for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area, and EPA is proposing to
approve that inventory for the Area as a SIP revision. EPA is also
providing information on the status of its adequacy determination for
the motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) that are identified in the
maintenance plan for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area for purposes of
transportation conformity, and is proposing to approve those MVEBs. EPA
is proposing approval of the redesignation request, the maintenance
plan, and 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 25, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2007-0605 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-2007-0605, 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-
2007-0605. 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
[[Page 54391]]
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 Control, P.O. Box 8468,
400 Market Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Rehn, (215) 814-2176, 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 Clean Air 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 Commonwealth's Request?
VII. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and
Identified in the Maintenance Plan for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
Area Adequate and Approvable?
VIII. Proposed Actions
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What Are the Clean Air Actions EPA Is Proposing To Take?
On June 12, 2007, the PADEP formally submitted a request to
redesignate the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area from nonattainment to
attainment of the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone. Concurrently, Pennsylvania
submitted a maintenance plan for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area as a
SIP revision to ensure continued attainment in the Area over the next
11 years. PADEP also submitted a 2002 base-year inventory for the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area as a SIP revision. The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
Area is comprised of Lackawanna, Luzerne, Monroe, and Wyoming Counties.
It is currently designated a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. EPA
is proposing to determine that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area from
nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also
proposing to approve the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre maintenance plan as a
SIP revision for the Area (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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
Area for the next 11 years. EPA is also proposing to approve the 2002
base-year inventory for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area as a SIP
revision. Additionally, EPA is announcing its action on the adequacy
process for the MVEBs identified in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
maintenance plan, and proposing to approve the MVEBs identified for
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOX)
for the Area 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 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 Scranton/
Wilkes-Barre Area was designated a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment
area 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area (as
well as most other areas of the country), effective June 15, 2005. See
40 CFR 50.9(b); 69 FR at 23996 (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 (D.C. Cir.
2006) (hereafter ``South Coast''). 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 D.C. 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
[[Page 54392]]
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.
Elsewhere in this document, mainly in section VI. B. ``The Scranton/
Wilkes-Barre 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 discusses its rationale why
the decision in South Coast is not an impediment to redesignating the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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. In 2004, the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area was
classified a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment area based on air quality
monitoring data from 2001-2003. Therefore, the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
Area 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 indicates that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area has a
design value of 0.075 ppm for the 3-year period of 2004-2006, using
complete, quality-assured data. Therefore, the ambient ozone data for
the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area indicates no violations of the 8-hour
ozone standard.
B. The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area
The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area consists of Lackawanna, Luzerne,
Monroe, and Wyoming Counties in Pennsylvania. Prior to its designation
as an 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area
was a marginal 1-hour ozone nonattainment Area (which included Columbia
County, in addition to those counties comprising the 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area). Therefore, the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area was
subject to requirements for marginal nonattainment areas pursuant to
section 182(a) of the Clean Air Act. See 56 FR 56694 (November 6,
1991). EPA determined that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 1-hour ozone
nonattainment Area had attained the 1-hour ozone NAAQS by the November
15, 1993 attainment date (60 FR 3349, January 17, 1995).
On June 12, 2007, the PADEP requested that the Scranton/Wilkes-
Barre Area be redesignated to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard.
The redesignation request included three 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area.
The data satisfies the Clean Air Act requirements that 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), must
be 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 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)
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.
EPA provided guidance on redesignations in the General Preamble for
the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act, 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 (Act) Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John
Calcagni Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;
``Technical Support Documents (TSDs) 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
[[Page 54393]]
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, the PADEP requested redesignation of the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard.
On June 12, 2007, PADEP submitted a maintenance plan for the Scranton/
Wilkes-Barre Area as a SIP revision, to ensure continued attainment of
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS over the next 11 years, until 2018. PADEP also
submitted a 2002 base-year inventory concurrently with its maintenance
plan as a SIP revision. EPA has determined that the Scranton/Wilkes-
Barre Area has attained the 8-hour ozone standard and has met the
requirements for redesignation set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E).
V. What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?
Approval of the redesignation request would change the official
designation of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area for the next 11 years,
until 2018. The maintenance plan includes contingency measures to
remedy any future violations of the 8-hour NAAQS (should they occur),
and identifies the NOX and VOC MVEBs for transportation conformity
purposes for the years 2009 and 2018. These MVEBs are displayed in the
following table:
Table 1.--Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets, in Tons
per Summer Day (tpsd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009............................................. 25.2 48.3
2018.............................................. 16.9 23.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Commonwealth's Request?
EPA is proposing to determine that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area
has attained the 8-hour ozone standard, and that all other
redesignation criteria have been met. The following is a description of
how the PADEP's June 12, 2007 submittal satisfies the requirements of
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act.
A. The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area Has Attained the 8-Hour NAAQS
EPA is proposing to determine that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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, 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 Scranton-Wilkes-Barre Area, there were four ozone monitors
that measured ambient ozone air quality between 2004 and 2006. Two of
these monitors are located in Lackawanna County and two are in Luzerne
County. As part of its redesignation request, Pennsylvania referenced
ozone monitoring data for the years 2004-2006 for the Scranton/Wilkes-
Barre Area. This data has been quality assured and is recorded in the
AQS. The PADEP uses the AQS as the permanent database to maintain its
data and quality assures the data transfers and content for accuracy.
The fourth-high 8-hour daily maximum concentrations for the period from
2004-2006, along with the three-year average, are summarized in Table
2.
Table 2.--Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area Fourth Highest 8-Hour Average Values (2004-2006)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual 4th highest reading (ppm)
Monitor/County/AIRS ID -----------------------------------------------
2004 2005 2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wilson Fire Company Monitor, Lackawanna County, AQS ID 42-069- 0.071 0.080 0.071
0101...........................................................
City of Scranton Monitor, Luzerne County AQS ID 42-069-2006..... 0.073 0.080 0.070
Nanticoke Monitor, Luzerne County AQS ID 42-079-1100............ 0.068 0.074 0.064
Wilkes-Barre Monitor, Luzerne County AQS ID 42-079-1101......... 0.073 0.081 0.073
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Area design value for the 3-year period 2004-2006 is 0.075 ppm (based on Wilkes-Barre Monitor/AQS ID 42-079-
1101)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The air quality data for 2004-2006 show that the Scranton/Wilkes-
Barre Area has attained the standard with a design value of 0.075 ppm.
The data collected at the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area monitors satisfies
the Clean Air Act requirement that the 3-year average of the annual
fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration is less
than or equal to 0.08 ppm. The PADEP's request for redesignation for
the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area indicates that the data is complete and
was quality assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. 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
data taken from AQS indicate that the Area has attained the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.
B. The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area has met all
[[Page 54394]]
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 which requirements are applicable to the Scranton/
Wilkes-Barre 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 came 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 at 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003)
(redesignation of St. Louis).
This section 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 alters
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 includes 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 requirements (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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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, October 10,
1996), (62 FR 24826, 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 at 37890, June 19,
2000), and in the Pittsburgh redesignation (66 FR at 53099, 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(1) 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
nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation.
As we explain later in this notice, no Part D requirements applicable
for purposes of redesignation under the 8-hour standard became due for
the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area prior to submission of the redesignation
request
2. Part D Nonattainment Requirements Under the 8-Hour Standard
Pursuant to an April 30, 2004, final rule (69 FR 23951), the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area was designated a basic nonattainment area
under subpart 1 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 applicable to all nonattainment areas.
Section 182 of the Clean Air Act, found in subpart 2 of Part D,
establishes additional specific requirements depending on the area's
nonattainment classification.
[[Page 54395]]
With respect to the 8-hour standard, 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 area 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 redesignation
requests 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.
First, at the time the redesignation request was submitted, the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area was classified under subpart 1 and was
obligated to meet only 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. See 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 D.C. Circuit has recognized the inequity in such
retroactive rulemaking, Sierra Club v. Whitman, 285 F. 3d 63 (D.C. Cir.
2002), in which the D.C. 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 plans 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 8-hour subpart 2 requirements, if the Scranton/
Wilkes-Barre Area initially had been classified under subpart 2, the
first two Part D subpart 2 requirements applicable to the Area under
section 182(a) of the Clean Air Act would be: A base-year inventory
requirement pursuant to section 182(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act, and,
the emissions statement requirement pursuant to section 182(a)(3)(B).
As stated previously, these requirements are not yet due for
purposes of redesignation of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area, but
nevertheless, Pennsylvania already has in its approved SIP, an
emissions statement rule for the 1-hour standard that covers all
portions of the designated 8-hour nonattainment area and, that
satisfies the emissions statement requirement for the 8-hour standard.
See, 25 Pa. Code 135.21(a)(1), codified at 40 CFR 52.2020; 60 FR 2881,
January 12, 1995. With respect to the base-year inventory requirement,
in this notice of proposed rulemaking, EPA is proposing to approve the
2002 base-year inventory for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area, which was
submitted on June 12, 2007, concurrently with its maintenance plan SIP
revision. EPA is proposing to approve the 2002 base-year inventory as
fulfilling the requirements of both section 182(a)(1) and section
172(c)(3) of the Clean Air Act. A detailed evaluation of Pennsylvania's
2002 base-year inventory for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area can be
found in a Technical Support Document (TSD) prepared by EPA for this
rulemaking. EPA has determined that the emission inventory and
emissions statement requirements for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area
have been satisfied.
In addition to the fact that Part D requirements applicable for
purposes of redesignation did not become due prior to submission of the
redesignation request, EPA believes that the general conformity and NSR
requirements do not require 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 the 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area, EPA has also
determined that before being redesignated, the Area need not comply
with the requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to
redesignation. EPA has 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 or Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.''
Normally, a 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 (61 FR 20458, 20469-70,
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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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
[[Page 54396]]
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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
Area.
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 reasonably available control technology (RACT), and Vehicle
Inspection and Maintenance programs even after redesignation. Second,
the section 184 control measures are region-wide requirements and do
not apply to the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area solely by virtue of the
Area's designation and classification. See 61 FR 53174, 53175-53176
(October 10, 1996) and 62 FR 24826, 24830-32 (May 7, 1997).
3. Part D Nonattainment Area Requirements Under the 1-Hour Standard
In its June 8, 2007 decision, the Court limited its vacatur so as
to uphold those provisions of the anti-backsliding requirements that
were not successfully challenged. Therefore the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
Area must meet the federal anti-backsliding requirements. See 40 CFR
51.900, et seq.; 70 FR 30592, 30604 (May 26, 2005), which apply by
virtue of the Area's classification for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. As set
forth in more detail below, the Area must also address four additional
anti-backsliding provisions identified by the Court in its decisions.
The anti-backsliding provisions at 40 CFR 51.905(a)(1) prescribe 1-
hour ozone NAAQS requirements that continue to apply after revocation
of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS to former 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas.
Section 51.905(a)(1)(i) provides that: ``The area remains subject to
the obligation to adopt and implement the applicable requirements as
defined in section 51.900(f), except as provided in paragraph
(a)(1)(iii) of paragraph (b) of this section.''
Section 51.900(f), as amended by 70 FR 30592, 30604 (May 26, 2005),
states that:
Applicable requirements means for an area the following
requirements to the extent such requirements applied to the area for
the area's classification under section 181(a)(1) of the Clean Air
Act for the 1-hour NAAQS at the time of designation for the 8-hour
NAAQS.
(1) Reasonably available control technology (RACT).
(2) Inspection and maintenance programs (I/M).
(3) Major source applicability cut-offs for purposes of RACT.
(4) Rate of Progress (ROP) reductions.
(5) Stage II vapor recovery.
(6) Clean fuels fleet program under section 183(c)(4) of the
Clean Air Act.
(7) Clean fuels for boilers under section 182(e)(3) of the Clean
Air Act.
(8) Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) during heavy traffic
hours as required by section 182(e)(4) of the Clean Air Act.
(9) Enhanced (ambient) monitoring under section 182(c)(1) of the
Clean Air Act.
(10) Transportation control measures (TCMs) under section
182(c)(5) of the Clean Air Act.
(11) Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) provisions of section
182(d)(1) of the Clean Air Act.
(12) NOX requirements under section 182(f) of the
Clean Air Act.
(13) Attainment demonstration or alternative as provided under
section 51.905(a)(1)(ii).
Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.905(c), the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area is
subject to the obligations set forth in 51.905(a) and 51.900(f).
Prior to its designation as an 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area was designated a marginal nonattainment area
for the 1-hour standard. With respect to the 1-hour standard, the
applicable requirements under the anti-backsliding provisions at 40 CFR
51.905(a)(1) for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area are limited to RACT and
I/M programs specified in section 182(a) of the Clean Air Act and are
discussed in the following paragraphs:
Section 182(a)(2)(A) required SIP revisions to correct or amend
RACT for sources in marginal areas, such as the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
Area, that were subject to control technique guidelines (CTGs) issued
before November 15, 1990 pursuant to Clean Air Act section 108. On
December 22, 1994, EPA fully approved into the Pennsylvania SIP all
corrections required under section 182(a)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act
(59 FR 65971, December 22, 1994). EPA believes that this requirement
applies only to marginal and higher classified areas under the 1-hour
NAAQS pursuant to the 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act; therefore,
this is a one-time requirement. After an area has fulfilled the section
182(a)(2)(A) requirement for the 1-hour NAAQS, there is no requirement
under the 8-hour NAAQS.
Section 182(a)(2)(B) relates to the savings clause for vehicle
inspection and maintenance (I/M). It requires marginal areas to adopt
vehicle I/M programs. This provision was not applicable to the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area because this area did not have, and was not
required to have, an I/M program before November 15, 1990.
In addition the Court held that EPA should have retained four
additional measures in its anti-backsliding provisions: (1)
Nonattainment area NSR; (2) Section 185 penalty fees; (3) contingency
measures under section 172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9) of the Clean Air Act; and
(4) 1-hour motor vehicle emission budgets that were yet not replaced by
8-hour emissions budgets. These requirements are addressed below:
With respect to NSR, EPA has determined that areas being
redesignated need not have an approved nonattainment New Source Review
program, for the same reasons discussed previously with respect to the
applicable Part D requirement for the 8-hour standard.
The section 185 penalty fee requirement was not applicable in the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 1-hour marginal nonattainment area.
With respect to the requirement for submission of contingency
measures for the 1-hour standard, section 182(a) does not require
contingency measures for marginal areas.
The conformity portion of the Court's ruling does not impact the
redesignation request for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area except to the
extent that the Court in its June 8 decision clarified that for those
areas with 1-hour MVEBs, anti-backsliding requires that those 1-hour
budgets must be used for 8-hour conformity determinations until
replaced by 8-hour budgets. To meet this requirement, conformity
determinations in such areas must comply with the applicable
requirements of EPA's conformity regulations at 40 CFR part 93. The
court clarified that 1-hour conformity determinations are not required
for anti-backsliding purposes.
Thus EPA has concluded that the area has met all requirements
applicable for redesignation under the 1-hour standard.
4. Transport Region Requirements
All areas in the Ozone Transport Region (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 RACT, NSR,
[[Page 54397]]
enhanced vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M), and Stage II vapor
recovery or a comparable measure.
In the case of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area, which is located in
the OTR, nonattainment NSR will continue to be applicable after
redesignation. On October 19, 2001, EPA approved the 1-hour NSR SIP
revision for the Area. See 66 FR 53094 (October 19, 2001).
EPA has also interpreted the section 184 OTR requirements,
including NSR, as not being applicable for purposes of redesignation.
Reading, PA Redesignation, 61 FR 53174, (October 10, 1996), 62 FR 24826
(May 7, 1997). 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 Commonwealth remains obligated to have
NSR, as well as RACT, and I/M even after redesignation. Second, the
section 184 control measures are region-wide requirements and do not
apply to the area by virtue of the area's nonattainment designation and
classification, and thus are properly considered not relevant to an
action changing an area's designation. See 61 FR 53174, 53175-6
(October 10, 1996) and 62 FR 24826, 24830-32 (May 7, 1997).
5. Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Has a Fully Approved SIP for Purposes of
Redesignation
EPA has fully approved the Pennsylvania SIP for the purposes of
this 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 68 FR at
25425 (May 12, 2003) and citations therein.
C. The Air Quality Improvement in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 Summer Day (tpsd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nonroad Highway
Year Point* Area mobile mobile Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002............................ 4.6 36.0 36.6 19.0 96.2
2004............................ 3.8 35.3 31.6 18.9 89.6
Difference (2002-04)............ -0.8 -0.7 -5.0 -0.1 -6.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nitrogen Oxides (NOX)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002............................ 8.4 3.8 74.4 11.3 97.9
2004............................ 7.0 3.9 66.1 10.9 87.9
Difference (2002-04)............ -1.4 +0.1 -8.3 -0.4 -10.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The stationary point source emissions shown do not include banked emissions reduction credits (ERCs) for
sources listed in Technical Appendix A-4 to Pennsylvania's SIP submission.
The banked ERCs include the following:
[cir] MACtac, Scranton Facility--0.20 tpsd VOC.
[cir] Proctor & Gamble, Hehoopany--1.70 tpsd VOC and 0.73 tpsd NOX.
[cir] TECHNEGLAS, Pittston--2.11 tpsd VOC and 0.09 tpsd NOX.
[cir] Thomson No. 1, Dunmore--0.15 tpsd VOC and 0.02 tpsd NOX.
[cir] Williams Generation, Hazelton Cogeneration--2.61 tpsd NOX.
Between 2002 and 2004, VOC emissions decreased by 6.6 tpsd from
96.2 tpsd to 89.6 tpsd. NOX emissions decreased over the
same period by 10.0 tpsd from 97.9 tpsd to 87.9 tpsd. 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. These reductions, as
well as anticipated future reductions, are due to the following
permanent and enforceable measures.
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 Engine and Vehicle Standards (62 FR 54694, October 21,
1997, and 65 FR 59896, October 6, 2000)
National Low Emission Vehicle (NLEV) Program (64 FR 72564, December 28,
1999)
PA Vehicle Emission Inspection/Maintenance Program & Changes to Vehicle
Safety Inspection Program in non-I/M Counties (70 FR 58313, October 6,
2005)
4. Non-Road Sources
Non-road Diesel (69 FR 38958, June 29, 2004)
D. The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area Has a Fully Approvable Maintenance
Plan Pursuant to Section 175A of the Clean Air Act
In conjunction with its request to redesignate the Scranton/Wilkes-
Barre ozone nonattainment Area to attainment status, Pennsylvania
submitted a SIP revision to provide for maintenance of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS in the Area for at least 11 years after redesignation. The
Commonwealth is requesting that EPA approve this SIP revision as
meeting the requirement of Clean Air
[[Page 54398]]
Act section 175A. Once approved, the maintenance plan for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS will ensure that the SIP for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 175 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 Commonwealth must submit a revised maintenance plan
demonstrating that attainment will continue to be maintained for the 10
years 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 memorandum dated September 4,
1992, provides additional guidance on the content of a maintenance
plan. An ozone maintenance plan should address the following
provisions:
(a) An attainment emissions inventory;
(b) A maintenance demonstration;
(c) A monitoring network;
(d) Verification of continued attainment; and
(e) A contingency plan.
Analysis of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area Maintenance Plan
(a) Attainment inventory--An attainment inventory includes the
emissions during the time period associated with the monitoring data
showing attainment. PADEP determined that the appropriate attainment
inventory year is 2004. That year establishes a reasonable year within
the three-year block of 2004-2006 as a baseline 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.
The 2002 and 2004 point source data was compiled from actual
sources. 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 Systems and EPA's
publication series AP-42, and are based on Source Classification Codes
(SCC). The 2002 area source data was compiled using county-level
activity data, from census numbers, from county numbers, etc. The 2004
area source data was projected from the 2002 inventory using temporal
allocations provided by the Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management
Association (MARAMA).
The on-road mobile source inventories for 2002 and 2004 were
compiled using MOBILE6.2 and Pennsylvania Department of Transportation
(PENNDOT) estimates for VMT. The PADEP has provided detailed data
summaries to document the calculations of mobile on-road VOC and
NOX emissions for 2002, as well as for the projection years
of 2004, 2009, and 2018 (shown in Tables 5 and 6 below).
The 2002 and 2004 emissions for the majority of non-road emission
source categories were estimated using the EPA NONROAD 2005 model. The
NONROAD model calculates emissions for diesel, gasoline, liquefied
petroleum gasoline, and compressed natural gas-fueled non-road
equipment types and includes growth factors. The NONROAD model does not
estimate emissions from locomotives or aircraft. For 2002 and 2004
locomotive emissions, the PADEP projected emissions from a 1999 survey
using national fuel consumption information and EPA emission and
conversion factors. Emissions from commercial aircraft for 2002 and
2004 are estimated using EPA-approved Emissions & Dispersion Modeling
System (EDMS) 4.20, the latest version available at the time the
inventory was prepared. The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre International Airport
(AVP) accounts for all commercial air traffic in the area. Small
aircraft emissions were calculated using small airport statistics from
the Federal Aviation Administration's APO Terminal Area Forecast Report
and the Web site http://www.airnav.com.
More detailed information on the compilation of the 2002, 2004,
2009, and 2018 inventories can found in the Technical Appendices, which
are part of the June 12, 2007 state submittal.
(b) Maintenance Demonstration--On June 12, 2007, the PADEP
submitted a maintenance plan as required by section 175A of the Clean
Air Act. The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area maintenance 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 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 25430-32.
Tables 4 and 5 specify the VOC and NOX emissions for the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area for 2004, 2009, and 2018. The PADEP chose
2009 as an interim year in the 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
maintenance period.
Table 4.--Total VOC Emissions for 2004-2018 (tpsd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source category 2004 2009 2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point........................................................... 3.8 4.6 5.9
Area............................................................ 35.3 33.7 36.3
Highway Mobile.................................................. 31.6 2.2 16.9
Nonroad Mobile.................................................. 18.9 16.5 13.2
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 89.6 80.0 72.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 54399]]
Table 5.--Total NOX Emissions for 2004-2018 (tpsd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source category 2004 2009 2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point........................................................... 7.0 9.3 10.4
Area............................................................ 3.9 4.1 4.4
Highway Mobile.................................................. 66.1 48.3 23.7
Nonroad Mobile.................................................. 10.9 8.9 5.6
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 87.9 70.6 44.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, 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:
The Clean Air Interstate Rule (71 FR 25328, April 28,
2006).
The Federal NOX SIP Call (66 FR 43795, August
21, 2001).
Portable Fuel Containers Rule (69 FR 70893, December 8,
2004).
Consumer Products Rule (69 FR 70895, December 8, 2004).
Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings
(69 FR 68080, November 23, 2004).
Federal Light-duty Highway Vehicle Control Program
(FMVCP)--Tier 1/Tier 2 Emissions Standards (Model Year 1994/2004);
(Tier 1--56 FR 25724, June 5, 1991); (Tier 2--65 FR 6698, February 10,
2000).
Federal Heavy-duty Diesel Highway Engine Standards (Model
Year 2004/2007)/Low-Sulfur Highway Diesel Fuel Standards (2006); (66 FR
5002, January 18, 2001).
Federal Nonroad Engine Emission Standards (Model Year
2008) and Nonroad Diesel Fuel 2007); (69 FR 38958, June 29, 2004).
NLEV/PA Clean Vehicle Program (54 FR 72564, December 28,
1999).
PA Vehicle Emission Inspection and Maintenance Program and
Changes to Vehicle Safety Inspection Program for Non-I/M Counties (70
FR 58313, October 6, 2005).
Based on 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area.
(c) Monitoring Network--There are four ozone monitors (located in
Lackawanna and Luzerne Counties) that were used to support the
Commonwealth's ozone maintenance plan for the Scranton/Wilkes/Barre
area. The Commonwealth has committed to continue to operate its
monitoring network in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, with no reduction
in the number of sites.
(d) Verification of Continued Attainment--In addition to
maintaining the key elements of its regulatory program, the
Commonwealth will track the attainment status of the ozone NAAQS in the
Area by reviewing air quality and emissions data during the maintenance
period. The Commonwealth will perform an annual evaluation of 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 51, subpart A) to
see if they exceed the attainment year inventory (2004) by more than 10
percent. The PADEP will also continue to operate the existing ozone
monitoring station in the Area pursuant to 40 CFR part 58 throughout
the maintenance period and submit quality-assured ozone data to EPA
through the AQS system. Section 175A(b) of the Clean Air Act states
that eight years following redesignation of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
Area, PADEP will be required to submit a second maintenance plan that
will ensure attainment through 2028. PADEP has made that commitment to
meet the requirement section 175A(b).
(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 Commonwealth 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 8-hour ozone concentration at any Scranton/
Wilkes-Barre Area monitor is above 84 ppb. If this trigger point
occurs, the Commonwealth will evaluate whether additional local
emission control measures should be implemented in order to prevent a
violation of the air quality standard. PADEP will also analyze the
conditions leading to the excessive ozone levels and evaluate which
measures might be most effective in correcting the excessive ozone
levels. PADEP will also analyze the potential emissions effect of
Federal, state and local measures that have been adopted but not yet
implemented at the time the excessive ozone levels occurred. PADEP will
then begin the process of implementing any selected measures.
Contingency measures will also be considered in the event that a
violation of the 8-hour ozone standard occurs at any Scranton/Wilkes-
Barre Area monitor. In the event of a violation of the 8-hour ozone
standard, PADEP will adopt additional emissions reduction measures as
expeditiously as practicable in accordance with the implementation
schedule listed later in this notice and in the Pennsylvania Air
Pollution Control Act in order to return the Area to attainment with
the standard. Contingency measures to be considered for the Scranton/
Wilkes-Barre Area will include, but not be limited to the following:
Regulatory measures:
--Additional controls on consumer products.
[[Page 54400]]
--Additional controls on portable fuel containers.
Non-Regulatory measures:
--Voluntary diesel engine ``chip reflash'' (installation software to
correct the defeat device option on certain heavy-duty diesel engines).
--Diesel retrofits, including replacement, repowering or alternative
fuel use, for public or private local on-road or off-road 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.
The plan sets forth a process to have regulatory contingency
measures in effect within 19 months of the trigger. The plan also lays
out a process to implement non-regulatory contingency measures within
12-24 months of the trigger.
VII. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and Identified
in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Maintenance Plan 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., reasonable further progress 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. In the maintenance
plan, the MVEBs are termed ``on-road mobile source emission budgets.''
Pursuant to 40 CFR part 93 and 51.112, MVEBs must be established in an
ozone maintenance plan. An MVEB is the portion of the total allowable
emissions that is allocated to highway and transit vehicle use and
emissions. An 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 a 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 contained
therein ``adequate'' for use in determining transportation conformity.
After EPA affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB is adequate for
transportation conformity purposes, the 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area are listed in Table 1
for 2009 and 2018. Table 1 presents the projected emissions for the on-
road mobile sources plus any portion of the safety margin allocated to
the MVEBs (safety margin allocation for 2009 and 2018 only). 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area. The total emissions from point, area, on-
road mobile, and nonroad mobile sources in 2004 equaled 89.6 tpsd of
VOC and 87.9 tpsd of NOX. The PADEP projects total emissions
for the year 2018 to be 72.3 tpsd of VOC and 44.1 tpsd of
NOX from all sources in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre area. The
safety margin for 2018 would be the difference between these amounts,
or 17.3 tpsd of VOC and 43.8 tpsd 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 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.--Safety Margins for Scranton/Wilkes-Barre (2009 & 2018)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC emissions NOX emissions
Inventory year (tpsd) (tpsd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004 Attainment......................... 89.6 87.9
2009 Interim............................ 80.0 70.6
[[Page 54401]]
2009 Safety Margin...................... 9.6 17.3
2004 Attainment......................... 89.6 87.9
2018 Final.............................. 72.3 44.1
2018 Safety Margin...................... 17.3 43.8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The PADEP allocated 1.85 tpsd VOC and 1.4 tpsd NOX of
the 2009 safety margin 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 2.6 tpsd VOC and
2.1 tpsd NOX 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area MVEBs.
Table 7.--Final Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
Area* (2009 & 2018)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC emissions NOX emissions
Inventory year (tpsd) (tpsd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009 Projected On road Emissions........ 23.3 46.9
2009 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs... 1.85 1.40
2009 MVEBs.............................. 25.2 48.3
2018 Projected On road Emissions........ 14.3 21.6
2018 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs... 2.6 2.1
2018 MVEBs.............................. 16.9 23.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*PA DEP calculates MVEBS using kilograms per summer day, and also lists
the values in tons per summer day, rounded to 3 significant digits.
This appears to make the totals in the table incorrect, but is merely
the result of the rounded tpsd values.
C. Why Are the MVEBs Approvable?
The 2009 and 2018 MVEBs for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area are
approvable because the MVEBs for VOCs and NOX 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 MVEBs in the
Maintenance Plan?
The MVEBs for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area maintenance plan are
being posted to EPA's conformity Web site concurrently 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 Clean Air 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 EPA is
proposing to approve the MVEBs as part of the maintenance plan. The
MVEBs cannot be used for transportation conformity until the
maintenance plan 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 Area's 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 Scranton/
Wilkes-Barre Area MVEBs will also be announced on EPA's conformity Web
site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/index.htm (from
there, click on ``Adequacy Review of SIP Submissions'').
VIII. Proposed Actions
EPA is proposing to determine that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area
has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve
the redesignation of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area from nonattainment
to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area from nonattainment to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. EPA is also proposing to
approve the associated maintenance plan for the Area, submitted on June
12, 2007, as a revision to the Pennsylvania SIP. EPA is proposing to
approve the maintenance plan for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area because
it meets the requirements of section 175A as described previously in
this notice. EPA is also proposing to approve the 2002 base-year
inventory for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area, and the MVEBs submitted
by Pennsylvania for the 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 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
[[Page 54402]]
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 or allows the state to
avoid adopting or implementing other requirements and because this
action does not impose any new requirements on sources, 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 Scranton/
Wilkes-Barre 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 oxides,
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: September 14, 2007.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. E7-18844 Filed 9-24-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P