[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 84 (Friday, May 1, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24874-24891]
[FR Doc No: 2015-10049]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0050; FRL-9927-03-Region 3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Redesignation Request and Associated Maintenance Plan for
the Lancaster Nonattainment Area for the 1997 Annual and 2006 24-Hour
Fine Particulate Matter Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's April 30, 2014 request to
redesignate to attainment the Lancaster nonattainment area (Lancaster
Area or Area) for both the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS or standards). EPA is also proposing to determine that
the Area continues to attain the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. In addition, EPA is proposing to approve as a
revision to the Pennsylvania State Implementation Plan (SIP) the
associated maintenance plan that was submitted with the redesignation
request, to show maintenance of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS through 2025 for the Area. The maintenance plan
includes the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and nitrogen oxides
(NOX) motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for the Area
for both NAAQS, which EPA is proposing to approve for transportation
conformity purposes. Furthermore, EPA is proposing to approve as a
revision to the Pennsylvania SIP the 2007 emissions inventory that is
also included in the maintenance plan for the Area for both NAAQS. This
rulemaking action to propose approval of the 1997 annual and 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS redesignation request and associated
maintenance plan for the Lancaster Area is based on EPA's determination
that Pennsylvania has met the criteria for redesignation to attainment
specified in the Clean Air Act (CAA) for both NAAQS.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 1, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2015-0050 by one of the following methods:
    A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    B. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0050, Cristina Fernandez, Associate
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, 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-
2015-0050. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at 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 www.regulations.gov or email. The
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 email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
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
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 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. 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: Leslie Jones Doherty,<PHONE_NUMBER>
or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. EPA's Requirements
    A. Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment
    B. Requirements of a Maintenance Plan
III. Summary of Proposed Actions
IV. Effects of Recent Court Decisions on Proposed Actions
    A. Effect of the Court Decision Regarding EPA's CSAPR
    B. Effect of the D.C. Circuit Court Decision Regarding
PM2.5 Implementation under Subpart 4 of Part D of Title I
of the CAA
V. EPA's Analysis of Pennsylvania's Submittal
    A. Redesignation Request
    B. Maintenance Plan
    C. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
VI. Proposed Actions
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    The first air quality standards for PM2.5 were
established on July 16, 1997 (62 FR 38652, July 18, 1997). EPA
promulgated an annual standard at a level of 15 micrograms per cubic
meter ([mu]g/m\3\), based on a three-year average of annual mean
PM2.5 concentrations (the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS). In the same rulemaking action, EPA promulgated a 24-hour
standard of 65 [mu]g/m\3\, based on a three-year average of the 98th
percentile of 24-hour concentrations.
    On January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944), EPA published air quality area
designations for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. In that rulemaking
action, EPA designated the Lancaster Area as nonattainment for the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Id. at 1000. The Lancaster Area is
comprised of Lancaster County in Pennsylvania. See 40 CFR 81.339
(Pennsylvania).
    On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), EPA retained the annual average
standard at 15 [mu]g/m\3\, but revised the 24-hour standard to 35
[mu]g/m\3\, based again on the three-year average of the 98th
percentile of 24-hour concentrations (the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS). On November 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688), EPA published designations
for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, which became effective on
December 14, 2009. In that

rulemaking action, EPA designated the Lancaster Area as nonattainment
for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. See 40 CFR 81.339
(Pennsylvania). This proposed rulemaking actions address the
redesignations to attainment for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS for the Lancaster Area.
    On September 25, 2009 (74 FR 48863) and March 29, 2012 (77 FR
18922), EPA made determinations that the Lancaster Area had attained
the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, respectively.
Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.1004(c) and based on these determinations, the
requirements for the Lancaster Area to submit an attainment
demonstration and associated reasonably available control measures
(RACM), a reasonable further progress (RFP) plan, contingency measures,
and other planning SIPs related to the attainment of either the 1997
annual or 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS are suspended until such
time as: The Area is redesignated to attainment for each standard, at
which time the requirements no longer apply; or EPA determines that the
Area has again violated any of the standards, at which time such plans
are required to be submitted. On July 29, 2011 (76 FR 45424), EPA also
determined, in accordance with section 179(c) of the CAA, that the
Lancaster Area attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by its
applicable attainment date of April 5, 2010.
    On April 30, 2014, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, through the
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP), formally
submitted a request to redesignate the Lancaster Area from
nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. Concurrently, PADEP submitted a combined
maintenance plan for the Area as a SIP revision to ensure continued
attainment throughout the Area over the next 10 years. The maintenance
plan includes the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and NOX
MVEBs for the Area for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. Also included in the maintenance plan is the
2007 comprehensive emissions inventory for both the 1997 annual and the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for PM2.5,
NOX, sulfur dioxide (SO2), volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), and ammonia (NH3).
    In this proposed rulemaking action, EPA also addresses the effects
of several decisions of the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit Court) and a decision of the United
States Supreme Court: (1) The D.C. Circuit Court's August 21, 2012
decision to vacate and remand to EPA the Cross-State Air Pollution
Control Rule (CSAPR); (2) the Supreme Court's April 29, 2014 reversal
of the vacature of CSAPR, and remand to the D.C. Circuit Court; (3) the
D.C. Circuit Court's October 23, 2014 decision to lift the stay of
CSAPR; and (4) the D.C. Circuit Court's January 4, 2013 decision to
remand to EPA two final rules implementing the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS.

II. EPA's Requirements

A. Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment

    The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA
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 of the CAA; and (5) the state containing
such area has met all requirements applicable to the area under section
110 and part D. Each of these requirements are discussed in Section V.
of this proposed rulemaking action.
    EPA has provided guidance on redesignation in the ``State
Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the Implementation of Title
I of the Clear Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' (57 FR 13498, April 16,
1992) (the ``General Preamble'') and has provided further guidance on
processing redesignation requests in the following documents: (1)
``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4, 1992 (hereafter the ``1992 Calcagni
Memorandum''); (2) ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted
in Response to Clean Air Act (CAA) Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John
Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;
and (3) ``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.

B. Requirements of a Maintenance Plan

    Section 175A of the CAA 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 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 PM2.5
violations.
    The 1992 Calcagni Memorandum provides additional guidance on the
content of a maintenance plan. The Memorandum states that a maintenance
plan should address the following provisions: (1) An attainment
emissions inventory; (2) a maintenance demonstration showing
maintenance for 10 years; (3) a commitment to maintain an appropriate
air quality monitoring network in accordance with 40 CFR part 58; (4)
verification of continued attainment; and, (5) a contingency plan to
prevent or correct future violations of the NAAQS.
    Under the CAA, states are required to submit, at various times,
control strategy SIP revisions for nonattainment areas and maintenance
plans for areas seeking redesignation to attainment for a given NAAQS.
These emission control strategy SIP revisions (e.g., RFP and attainment
demonstration SIP revisions) and maintenance plans also create MVEBs
based on onroad mobile source emissions for the relevant criteria
pollutants and/or their precursors, where appropriate, to address
pollution from onroad transportation sources. The MVEBs are the
portions of the total allowable emissions that are allocated to onroad
vehicle use that, together with emissions from all other sources in the
area, will provide attainment, RFP, or maintenance, as applicable. The
budget serves as a ceiling on emissions from an area's planned
transportation system. Under 40 CFR part 93, a MVEB for an area seeking
a redesignation to attainment is established for the last year of the
maintenance plan.
    The maintenance plan for the Lancaster Area, which is comprised of
Lancaster County in Pennsylvania,

includes the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs
for transportation conformity purposes. The transportation conformity
determination for the Area is further discussed in Section V.C. of this
proposed rulemaking action and in a technical support document (TSD),
``Adequacy Findings for the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in the
Maintenance Plan for the Lancaster 1997 and 2006 Fine Particulate
National Ambient Air Quality Standard Nonattainment Area,'' dated 2/25/
15, available on line at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2015-0050.

III. Summary of Proposed Actions

    EPA is proposing to take several rulemaking actions related to the
redesignation of the Lancaster Area to attainment for both the 1997
annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is proposing to
find that the Lancaster Area meets the requirements for redesignation
of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS under
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is thus proposing to approve
Pennsylvania's request to change the legal designation of the Lancaster
Area from nonattainment to attainment for both the 1997 annual and 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve the
associated maintenance plan for the Lancaster Area as a revision to the
Pennsylvania SIP for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS, including the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and NOX
MVEBs for the Area for transportation conformity purposes. Approval of
the maintenance plan is one of the CAA criteria for redesignation of
the Area to attainment for both NAAQS. Pennsylvania's combined
maintenance plan is designed to ensure continued attainment of the 1997
annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in the Area for at least
10 years after redesignation.
    EPA previously determined that the Lancaster Area attained both the
1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS (see 74 FR 48863
(September 25, 2009) and 77 FR 18922 (March 29, 2012)), and EPA is
proposing to find that the Area continues to attain both NAAQS. EPA is
also proposing to approve the 2007 comprehensive emissions inventory
submitted with Pennsylvania's maintenance plan that includes an
inventory of PM2.5, SO2, NOX, VOC, and
NH3 for the Area as a revision to the Pennsylvania SIP for
the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in order to
meet the requirements of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. EPA's analysis
of the proposed actions is provided in Section V. of this proposed
rulemaking.

IV. Effects of Recent Court Decisions on Proposed Actions

A. Effect of the Court Decision Regarding EPA's CSAPR

1. Background
    The D.C. Circuit Court and the Supreme Court have issued a number
of decisions and orders regarding the status of EPA's regional trading
programs for transported air pollution, the Clean Air Interstate Rule
(CAIR) and CSAPR, that impact this proposed redesignation action. In
2008, the D.C, Circuit Court initially vacated CAIR, North Carolina v.
EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008), but ultimately remanded the rule to
EPA without vacatur to preserve the environmental benefits provided by
CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008). On
August 8, 2011 (76 FR 48208), acting on the D.C. Circuit Court's
remand, EPA promulgated CSAPR, to address interstate transport of
emissions and resulting secondary air pollutants and to replace
CAIR.\1\ CSAPR requires substantial reductions of SO2 and
NOX emissions from electric generating units (EGUs) in 28
states in the Eastern United States. Implementation of CSAPR was
scheduled to begin on January 1, 2012, when CSAPR's cap-and-trade
programs would have superseded the CAIR cap-and-trade programs.
Numerous parties filed petitions for review of CSAPR, and on December
30, 2011, the D.C. Circuit Court issued an order staying CSAPR pending
resolution of the petitions and directing EPA to continue to administer
CAIR. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, No. 11-1302 (D.C. Cir.
Dec. 30, 2011), Order at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ CAIR addressed the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. CSAPR addresses contributions from
upwind states to downwind nonattainment and maintenance of the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS as well as the ozone and
PM2.5 NAAQS addressed by CAIR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 21, 2012, the D.C. Circuit Court issued its ruling,
vacating and remanding CSAPR to EPA and once again ordering continued
implementation of CAIR. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696
F.3d 7, 38 (D.C. Cir. 2012). The D.C. Circuit Court subsequently denied
EPA's petition for rehearing en banc. EME Homer City Generation, L.P.
v. EPA, No. 11-1302, 2013 WL 656247 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 24, 2013), at *1.
EPA and other parties then petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of
certiorari, and the Supreme Court granted the petitions on June 24,
2013. EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 133 S. Ct. 2857 (2013).
    On April 29, 2014, the Supreme Court vacated and reversed the D.C.
Circuit Court's decision regarding CSAPR, and remanded that decision to
the D.C. Circuit Court to resolve remaining issues in accordance with
its ruling. EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 134 S. Ct. 1584
(2014). EPA moved to have the stay of CSAPR lifted in light of the
Supreme Court decision. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, Case
No. 11-1302, Document No. 1499505 (D.C. Cir. filed June 26, 2014). In
its motion, EPA asked the D.C. Circuit Court to toll CSAPR's compliance
deadlines by three years, so that the Phase 1 emissions budgets apply
in 2015 and 2016 (instead of 2012 and 2013), and the Phase 2 emissions
budgets apply in 2017 and beyond (instead of 2014 and beyond). On
October 23, 2014, the D.C. Circuit Court granted EPA's motion and
lifted the stay of CSAPR which was imposed on December 30, 2011. EME
Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, No. 11-1302 (D.C. Cir. Oct. 23,
2014), Order at 3. On
    December 3, 2014, EPA issued an interim final rule to clarify how
EPA will implement CSAPR consistent with the D.C. Circuit Court's order
granting EPA's motion requesting lifting the stay and tolling the
rule's deadlines. See 79 FR 71663 (December 3, 2014) (interim final
rulemaking). Consistent with that rule, EPA began implementing CSAPR on
January 1, 2015.
2. Proposal on This Issue
    Because CAIR was promulgated in 2005 and incentivized sources and
states to begin achieving early emission reductions, the air quality
data examined by EPA in issuing a final determination of attainment for
the Lancaster Area in 2009 (September 25, 2009, 74 FR 48863) and the
air quality data from the Area since 2005 necessarily reflect
reductions in emissions from upwind sources as a result of CAIR, and
Pennsylvania includes CAIR as one of the measures that helped to bring
the Area into attainment. However, modeling conducted by EPA during the
CSAPR rulemaking process, which used a baseline emissions scenario that
``backed out'' the effects of CAIR, see 76 FR 48223, projected that the
Lancaster Area would have design values below the 1997 annual and the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for 2012 and 2014 without taking
into account emission reductions from CAIR or CSAPR. See Appendix B of
EPA's ``Air Quality Modeling Final Rule Technical Support Document,''
(Pages B-57 and B-86),

which is available in the docket for this proposed rulemaking action.
In addition, the 2011-2013 quality-assured, quality-controlled, and
certified monitoring data for the Lancaster Area confirms that the
PM2.5 annual design value for the Area remained well below
the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in 2013.
    The status of CSAPR is not relevant to this redesignation. CSAPR
was promulgated in June 2011, and the rule was stayed by the D.C.
Circuit Court just six months later, before the trading programs it
created were scheduled to go into effect. As stated previously, EPA
began implementing CSAPR on January 1, 2015, subsequent to the emission
reductions documented in the Commonwealth's April 30, 2014 request for
redesignation. Therefore, the Area's attainment of the 1997 annual or
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS cannot have been a result of
any emission reductions associated with CSAPR. In summary, neither the
status of CAIR nor the current status of CSAPR affects any of the
criteria for proposed approval of this redesignation request for the
Lancaster Area.

B. Effect of the D.C. Circuit Court Decision Regarding PM2.5
Implementation Under Subpart 4 of Part D of Title I of the CAA

1. Background
    On January 4, 2013, in NRD.C. v. EPA, the D.C. Circuit Court
remanded to EPA the ``Final Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation
Rule'' (72 FR 20586, April 25, 2007) and the ``Implementation of the
New Source Review (NSR) Program for PM2.5'' final rule (73
FR 28321, May 16, 2008) (collectively, ``1997 PM2.5
Implementation Rule''). 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013). The D.C. Circuit
Court found that EPA erred in implementing the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS pursuant to the general implementation
provisions of subpart 1 of Part D of Title I of the CAA (subpart 1),
rather than the particulate-matter-specific provisions of subpart 4 of
Part D of Title I (subpart 4).
    Prior to the January 4, 2013 decision, the states had worked
towards meeting the air quality goals of the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS in accordance with EPA regulations and guidance
derived from subpart 1 of Part D of Title I of the CAA. In response to
the D.C. Circuit Court's remand, EPA took this history into account by
setting a new deadline for any remaining submissions that may be
required for moderate nonattainment areas as a result of the D.C.
Circuit Court's decision regarding the applicability of subpart 4 of
Part D of Title I of the CAA.
    On June 2, 2014 (79 FR 31566), EPA issued a final rule,
``Identification of Nonattainment Classification and Deadlines for
Submission of SIP Provisions for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS'' (the PM2.5 Subpart 4 Classification and Deadline
Rule), which identifies the classification under subpart 4 as
``moderate'' for areas currently designated nonattainment for the 1997
annual and/or 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The rule sets a
deadline for states to submit attainment plans and meet other subpart 4
requirements. The rule specifies December 31, 2014 as the deadline for
states to submit any additional attainment-related SIP elements that
may be needed to meet the applicable requirements of subpart 4 for
areas currently designated nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5
and/or 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS and to submit SIPs addressing the
nonattainment new source review (NSR) requirements in subpart 4.
    As explained in detail in the following section, since Pennsylvania
submitted its request to redesignate the Lancaster Area on April 30,
2014, any additional attainment-related SIP elements that may be needed
for the Lancaster Area to meet the applicable requirements of subpart 4
were not due at the time Pennsylvania submitted its request to
redesignate the Area for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS.
2. Proposal on This Issue
    In this proposed rulemaking action, EPA addresses the effect of the
D.C. Circuit Court's January 4, 2013 decision and the June 2, 2014
PM2.5 Subpart 4 Classification and Deadline Rule on the
redesignation requests for the Area. EPA is proposing to determine that
the D.C. Circuit Court's January 4, 2013 decision does not prevent EPA
from redesignating the Area to attainment for the 1997 annual and the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Even in light of the D.C. Circuit
Court's decision, redesignation for this Area is appropriate under the
CAA and EPA's longstanding interpretations of the CAA's provisions
regarding redesignation. EPA first explains its longstanding
interpretation that requirements that are imposed, or that become due,
after a complete redesignation request is submitted for an area that is
attaining the standard, are not applicable for purposes of evaluating a
redesignation request. Second, EPA then shows that, even if EPA applies
the subpart 4 requirements to the redesignation requests of the Area
and disregards the provisions of its 1997 PM2.5
Implementation Rule recently remanded by the D.C. Circuit Court,
Pennsylvania's request for redesignation of the Area still qualifies
for approval. EPA's discussion also takes into account the effect of
the D.C. Circuit Court's ruling and the June 2, 2014 PM2.5
Subpart 4 Classification and Deadline Rule on the maintenance plans of
the Area, which EPA views as approvable even when subpart 4
requirements are considered.
a. Applicable Requirements Under Subpart 4 for Purposes of Evaluating
the Redesignation Request of the Area
    With respect to the 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule, the
D.C. Circuit Court's January 4, 2013 ruling rejected EPA's reasons for
implementing the PM2.5 NAAQS solely in accordance with the
provisions of subpart 1, and remanded that matter to EPA, so that it
could address implementation of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS
under subpart 4 of Part D of the CAA, in addition to subpart 1. For the
purposes of evaluating Pennsylvania's redesignation requests for the
Area, to the extent that implementation under subpart 4 would impose
additional requirements for areas designated nonattainment, EPA
believes that those requirements are not ``applicable'' for the
purposes of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, and thus EPA is not
required to consider subpart 4 requirements with respect to the
redesignation of the areas. Under its longstanding interpretation of
the CAA, EPA has interpreted section 107(d)(3)(E) to mean, as a
threshold matter, that the part D provisions which are ``applicable''
and which must be approved in order for EPA to redesignate an area
include only those which came due prior to a state's submittal of a
complete redesignation request. See 1992 Calcagni Memorandum. See also
``SIP Requirements for Areas Submitting Requests for Redesignation to
Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) NAAQS on or after
November 15, 1992,'' Memorandum from Michael Shapiro, Acting Assistant
Administrator, Air and Radiation, September 17, 1993 (Shapiro
memorandum); Final Redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor, (60 FR 12459,
12465-66, March 7, 1995); Final Redesignation of St. Louis, Missouri,
(68 FR 25418, 25424-27, May 12, 2003); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d
537, 541 (7th Cir. 2004) (upholding EPA's redesignation rulemaking
applying this interpretation and expressly rejecting Sierra Club's view
that the meaning of ``applicable'' under the statute is ``whatever
should have been in the plan

at the time of attainment rather than whatever actually was in the plan
and already implemented or due at the time of attainment'').\2\ In this
case, at the time that Pennsylvania submitted its redesignation request
for the 1997 and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, the
requirements under subpart 4 were not due.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Applicable requirements of the CAA 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 CAA.
    \3\ EPA found Pennsylvania's April 30, 2014 submittal for
redesignation of the Area complete on September 23, 2014. EPA's
completeness determination is available in the docket for this
rulemaking at regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0050.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's view that, for purposes of evaluating the redesignation of
the Pennsylvania portion of the Area, the subpart 4 requirements were
not due at the time Pennsylvania submitted the redesignation request is
in keeping with the EPA's interpretation of subpart 2 requirements for
subpart 1 ozone areas redesignated subsequent to the D.C. Circuit
Court's decision in South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, 472
F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006). In South Coast, the D.C. Circuit Court found
that EPA was not permitted to implement the 1997 8-hour ozone standard
solely under subpart 1, and held that EPA was required under the
statute to implement the standard under the ozone-specific requirements
of subpart 2 as well. Subsequent to the South Coast decision, in
evaluating and acting upon redesignation requests for the 1997 8-hour
ozone standard that were submitted to EPA for areas under subpart 1,
EPA applied its longstanding interpretation of the CAA that
``applicable requirements,'' for purposes of evaluating a
redesignation, are those that had been due at the time the
redesignation request was submitted. See, e.g., Proposed Redesignation
of Manitowoc County and Door County Nonattainment Areas (75 FR 22047,
22050, April 27, 2010). In those rulemaking actions, EPA therefore, did
not consider subpart 2 requirements to be ``applicable'' for the
purposes of evaluating whether the area should be redesignated under
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.
    EPA's interpretation derives from the provisions of section
107(d)(3) of the CAA. Section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) states that, for an area
to be redesignated, a state must meet ``all requirements `applicable'
to the area under section 110 and part D.'' Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii)
provides that EPA must have fully approved the ``applicable'' SIP for
the area seeking redesignation. These two sections read together
support EPA's interpretation of ``applicable'' as only those
requirements that came due prior to submission of a complete
redesignation request.
    First, holding states to an ongoing obligation to adopt new CAA
requirements that arose after the state submitted its redesignation
request, in order to be redesignated, would make it problematic or
impossible for EPA to act on redesignation requests in accordance with
the 18-month deadline Congress set for EPA action in section
107(d)(3)(D). If ``applicable requirements'' were interpreted to be a
continuing flow of requirements with no reasonable limitation, states,
after submitting a redesignation request, would be forced continuously
to make additional SIP submissions that in turn would require EPA to
undertake further notice-and-comment rulemaking actions to act on those
submissions. This would create a regime of unceasing rulemaking that
would delay action on the redesignation request beyond the 18-month
timeframe provided by the CAA for this purpose.
    Second, a fundamental premise for redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment is that the area has attained the relevant NAAQS due
to emission reductions from existing controls. Thus, an area for which
a redesignation request has been submitted would have already attained
the NAAQS as a result of satisfying statutory requirements that came
due prior to the submission of the request. Absent a showing that
unadopted and unimplemented requirements are necessary for future
maintenance, it is reasonable to view the requirements applicable for
purposes of evaluating the redesignation request as including only
those SIP requirements that have already come due. These are the
requirements that led to attainment of the NAAQS. To require, for
redesignation approval, that a state also satisfy additional SIP
requirements coming due after the state submits its complete
redesignation request, and while EPA is reviewing it, would compel the
state to do more than is necessary to attain the NAAQS, without a
showing that the additional requirements are necessary for maintenance.
    In the context of this redesignation, the timing and nature of the
D.C. Circuit Court's January 4, 2013 decision in NRDC v. EPA and EPA's
June 2, 2014 PM2.5 Subpart 4 Classification and Deadline
Rule, compound the consequences of imposing requirements that come due
after the redesignation request is submitted. Pennsylvania submitted
its redesignation request for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS on April 30, 2014 for the Lancaster Area, which
is prior to the deadline by which the Area is required to meet the
attainment plan and other requirements pursuant to subpart 4.
    To require Pennsylvania's fully-complete and pending redesignation
request for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS to
comply now with requirements of subpart 4 that the D.C. Circuit Court
announced only in January 2013 and for which the deadline to comply had
not yet come prior to submission of its request, would be to give
retroactive effect to such requirements and provide Pennsylvania a
unique and earlier deadline for compliance solely on the basis of
submitting its redesignation requests for the Area. The D.C. Circuit
Court recognized the inequity of this type of retroactive impact in
Sierra Club v. Whitman, 285 F.3d 63 (D.C. Cir. 2002),\4\ where it
upheld the D.C. Circuit Court's ruling refusing to make retroactive
EPA's determination that the areas did not meet their attainment
deadlines. In that case, petitioners urged the D.C. Circuit Court to
make EPA's nonattainment determination effective as of the date that
the statute required, rather than the later date on which EPA actually
made the determination. The D.C. Circuit Court rejected this view,
stating that applying it ``would likely impose large costs on States,
which would face fines and suits for not implementing air pollution
prevention plans . . . even though they were not on notice at the
time.'' Id. at 68. Similarly, it would be unreasonable to penalize
Pennsylvania by rejecting its redesignation request for an area that is
already attaining the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS and that met all applicable requirements known to be in effect at
the time of the request. For EPA now to reject the redesignation
request solely because Pennsylvania did not expressly address subpart 4
requirements which came due after receipt of such request, would
inflict the same unfairness condemned by the D.C. Circuit Court in
Sierra Club v. Whitman.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Sierra Club v. Whitman was discussed and distinguished in a
recent D.C. Circuit Court decision that addressed retroactivity in a
quite different context, where, unlike the situation here, EPA
sought to give its regulations retroactive effect. National
Petrochemical and Refiners Ass'n v. EPA. 630 F.3d 145, 163 (D.C.
Cir. 2010), rehearing denied 643 F.3d 958 (D.C. Cir. 2011), cert
denied 132 S. Ct. 571 (2011).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Subpart 4 Requirements and Pennsylvania's Redesignation Request
    Even if EPA were to take the view that the D.C. Circuit Court's
January 4, 2013 decision, or the June 2, 2014 PM2.5 Subpart
4 Classification and Deadline Rule, requires that, in the context of a
pending redesignation request for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS, which were submitted prior to December 31,
2014, subpart 4 requirements must be considered as being due and in
effect, EPA proposes to determine that the Area still qualifies for
redesignation to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. As explained subsequently, EPA believes that
the redesignation request for the Area, though not expressed in terms
of subpart 4 requirements, substantively meets the requirements of that
subpart for purposes of redesignating the Area to attainment for the
1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. With respect
to evaluating the relevant substantive requirements of subpart 4 for
purposes of redesignating the Area, EPA notes that subpart 4
incorporates components of subpart 1 of part D, which contains general
air quality planning requirements for areas designated as
nonattainment. See section 172(c). Subpart 4 itself contains specific
planning and scheduling requirements for coarse particulate matter
(PM10) \5\ nonattainment areas, and under the D.C. Circuit
Court's January 4, 2013 decision in NRDC v. EPA, these same statutory
requirements also apply for PM2.5 nonattainment areas. EPA
has longstanding general guidance that interprets the 1990 amendments
to the CAA, making recommendations to states for meeting the statutory
requirements for SIPs for nonattainment areas. See the General
Preamble. In the General Preamble, EPA discussed the relationship of
subpart 1 and subpart 4 SIP requirements, and pointed out that subpart
1 requirements were to an extent ``subsumed by, or integrally related
to, the more specific PM10 requirements'' (57 FR 13538,
April 16, 1992). The subpart 1 requirements include, among other
things, provisions for attainment demonstrations, RACM, RFP, emissions
inventories, and contingency measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ PM10 refers to particulates nominally 10
micrometers in diameter or smaller.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the purposes of this redesignation request, in order to
identify any additional requirements which would apply under subpart 4,
consistent with EPA's June 2, 2014 PM2.5 Subpart 4
Classification and Deadline Rule, EPA is considering the areas to be
``moderate'' PM2.5 nonattainment areas. As EPA explained in
its June 2, 2014 rule, section 188 of the CAA provides that all areas
designated nonattainment areas under subpart 4 are initially to be
classified by operation of law as ``moderate'' nonattainment areas, and
remain moderate nonattainment areas unless and until EPA reclassifies
the area as a ``serious'' nonattainment area. Accordingly, EPA believes
that it is appropriate to limit the evaluation of the potential impact
of subpart 4 requirements to those that would be applicable to moderate
nonattainment areas. Sections 189(a) and (c) of subpart 4 apply to
moderate nonattainment areas and include the following: (1) An approved
permit program for construction of new and modified major stationary
sources (section 189(a)(1)(A)); (2) an attainment demonstration
(section 189(a)(1)(B)); (3) provisions for RACM (section 189(a)(1)(C));
and (4) quantitative milestones demonstrating RFP toward attainment by
the applicable attainment date (section 189(c)).
    The permit requirements of subpart 4, as contained in section
189(a)(1)(A), refer to and apply the subpart 1 permit provisions
requirements of sections 172 and 173 to PM10, without adding
to them. Consequently, EPA believes that section 189(a)(1)(A) does not
itself impose for redesignation purposes any additional requirements
for moderate areas beyond those contained in subpart 1.\6\ In any
event, in the context of redesignation, EPA has long relied on the
interpretation that a fully approved nonattainment NSR program is not
considered an applicable requirement for redesignation, provided the
area can maintain the standard with a prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD) program after redesignation. A detailed rationale
for this view is described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled,
``Part D NSR Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to
Attainment.'' See also rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (60 FR 12467-
12468, March 7, 1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio (61 FR 20458,
20469-20470, May 7, 1996); Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665, October
23, 2001); and Grand Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 31834-31837, June 21,
1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The potential effect of section 189(e) on section
189(a)(1)(A) for purposes of evaluating this redesignation is
discussed in this rulemaking action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the specific attainment planning requirements under
subpart 4,\7\ when EPA evaluates a redesignation request under either
subpart 1 or 4, any area that is attaining the PM2.5 NAAQS
is viewed as having satisfied the attainment planning requirements for
these subparts. For redesignations, EPA has for many years interpreted
attainment-linked requirements as not applicable for areas attaining
the standard. In the General Preamble, EPA stated that: ``The
requirements for RFP will not apply in evaluating a request for
redesignation to attainment since, at a minimum, the air quality data
for the area must show that the area has already attained. Showing that
the State will make RFP towards attainment will, therefore, have no
meaning at that point.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ EPA refers here to attainment demonstration, RFP, RACM,
milestone requirements, and contingency measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The General Preamble also explained that: ``[t]he section 172(c)(9)
requirements are directed at ensuring RFP and attainment by the
applicable date. These requirements no longer apply when an area has
attained the standard and is eligible for redesignation. Furthermore,
section 175A for maintenance plans . . . provides specific requirements
for contingency measures that effectively supersede the requirements of
section 172(c)(9) for these areas.'' Id. EPA similarly stated in its
1992 Calcagni Memorandum that, ``The requirements for reasonable
further progress and other measures needed for attainment will not
apply for redesignations because they only have meaning for areas not
attaining the standard.''
    It is evident that even if we were to consider the D.C. Circuit
Court's January 4, 2013 decision in NRDC v. EPA, or the June 2, 2014
PM2.5 Subpart 4 Classification and Deadline Rule, to mean
that attainment-related requirements specific to subpart 4 were either
due prior to Pennsylvania's April 30, 2014 redesignation request or
became due subsequent to the April 30, 2014 redesignation request and
must now be imposed retroactively,\8\ those requirements do not apply
to areas that are attaining the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS for the purpose of evaluating a pending request
to redesignate the areas to attainment. EPA has consistently enunciated
this interpretation of applicable requirements under section
107(d)(3)(E) since the General Preamble was published more than twenty
years ago.

Courts have recognized the scope of EPA's authority to interpret
``applicable requirements'' in the redesignation context. See Sierra
Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ As explained earlier, EPA does not believe that the D.C.
Circuit Court's January 4, 2013 decision should be interpreted so as
to impose these requirements on the states retroactively. Sierra
Club v. Whitman, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, even outside the context of redesignations, EPA has
viewed the obligations to submit attainment-related SIP planning
requirements of subpart 4 as inapplicable for areas that EPA determines
are attaining the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
EPA's prior ``Clean Data Policy'' rulemakings for the PM10
NAAQS, also governed by the requirements of subpart 4, explain EPA's
reasoning. They describe the effects of a determination of attainment
on the attainment-related SIP planning requirements of subpart 4. See
``Determination of Attainment for Coso Junction Nonattainment Area,''
(75 FR 27944, May 19, 2010). See also Coso Junction Proposed
PM10 Redesignation, (75 FR 36023, 36027, June 24, 2010);
Proposed and Final Determinations of Attainment for San Joaquin
Nonattainment Area (71 FR 40952, 40954-55, July 19, 2006; and 71 FR
63641, 63643-47, October 30, 2006). In short, EPA in this context has
also long concluded that to require states to meet superfluous SIP
planning requirements is not necessary and not required by the CAA, so
long as those areas continue to attain the relevant NAAQS.
    As stated previously in this proposed rulemaking action, on
September 25, 2009 (74 FR 48863) and March 29, 2012 (77 FR 18922), EPA
made determinations that the Lancaster Area had attained the 1997
annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, respectively. Pursuant
to 40 CFR 51.1004(c) and based on these determinations, the
requirements for the Area to submit an attainment demonstration and
associated RACM, RFP plan, contingency measures, and other planning
SIPs related to the attainment of either the 1997 annual or 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS were, and continue to be, suspended until
such time as: The Area is redesignated to attainment for each standard,
at which time the requirements no longer apply; or EPA determines that
the Area has again violated any of the standards, at which time such
plans are required to be submitted. Under its longstanding
interpretation, EPA is proposing to determine here that the Area meets
the attainment-related plan requirements of subparts 1 and 4 for the
1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Thus, EPA is
proposing to conclude that the requirements to submit an attainment
demonstration under 189(a)(1)(B), a RACM determination under section
172(c)(1) and section 189(a)(1)(c), a RFP demonstration under
189(c)(1), and contingency measure requirements under section 172(c)(9)
are satisfied for purposes of evaluating this redesignation request.
c. Subpart 4 and Control of PM2.5 Precursors
    The D.C. Circuit Court in NRDC v. EPA remanded to EPA the two rules
at issue in the case with instructions to EPA to re-promulgate them
consistent with the requirements of subpart 4. EPA in this section
addresses the D.C. Circuit Court's opinion with respect to
PM2.5 precursors. While past implementation of subpart 4 for
PM10 has allowed for control of PM10 precursors
such as NOX from major stationary, mobile, and area sources
in order to attain the standard as expeditiously as practicable,
section 189(e) of the CAA specifically provides that control
requirements for major stationary sources of direct PM10
shall also apply to PM10 precursors from those sources,
except where EPA determines that major stationary sources of such
precursors ``do not contribute significantly to PM10 levels
which exceed the standard in the area.''
    EPA's 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule, remanded by the
D.C. Circuit Court, contained rebuttable presumptions concerning
certain PM2.5 precursors applicable to attainment plans and
control measures related to those plans. Specifically, in 40 CFR
51.1002, EPA provided, among other things, that a state was ``not
required to address VOC [and NH3] as . . . PM2.5
attainment plan precursor[s] and to evaluate sources of VOC [and
NH3] emissions in the State for control measures.'' EPA
intended these to be rebuttable presumptions. EPA established these
presumptions at the time because of uncertainties regarding the
emission inventories for these pollutants and the effectiveness of
specific control measures in various regions of the country in reducing
PM2.5 concentrations. EPA also left open the possibility for
such regulation of VOC and NH3 in specific areas where that
was necessary.
    The D.C. Circuit Court in its January 4, 2013 decision made
reference to both section 189(e) and 40 CFR 51.1002, and stated that,
``In light of our disposition, we need not address the petitioners'
challenge to the presumptions in [40 CFR 51.1002] that VOCs and
NH3 are not PM2.5 precursors, as subpart 4
expressly governs precursor presumptions.'' NRDC v. EPA, at 27, n.10.
    Elsewhere in the D.C. Circuit Court's opinion, however, the D.C.
Circuit Court observed: ``NH3 is a precursor to fine
particulate matter, making it a precursor to both PM2.5 and
PM10. For a PM10 nonattainment area governed by
subpart 4, a precursor is presumptively regulated. See 42 U.S.C.
7513a(e) [section 189(e)].'' Id. at 21, n.7.
    For a number of reasons, EPA believes that its proposed
redesignation of the Lancaster Area for the 1997 annual and the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS are consistent with the D.C. Circuit
Court's decision on this aspect of subpart 4. While the D.C. Circuit
Court, citing section 189(e), stated that ``for a PM10 area
governed by subpart 4, a precursor is `presumptively' regulated,'' the
D.C. Circuit Court expressly declined to decide the specific challenge
to EPA's 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule provisions regarding
NH3 and VOC as precursors. The D.C. Circuit Court had no
occasion to reach whether and how it was substantively necessary to
regulate any specific precursor in a particular PM2.5
nonattainment area, and did not address what might be necessary for
purposes of acting upon a redesignation request.
    However, even if EPA takes the view that the requirements of
subpart 4 were deemed applicable at the time the state submitted the
redesignation request, and disregards the 1997 PM2.5
Implementation Rule's rebuttable presumptions regarding NH3
and VOC as PM2.5 precursors, the regulatory consequence
would be to consider the need for regulation of all precursors from any
sources in the Area to demonstrate attainment and to apply the section
189(e) provisions to major stationary sources of precursors. In the
case of the Lancaster Area, EPA believes that doing so is consistent
with proposing redesignation of the Lancaster Area for the 1997 annual
and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The Lancaster Area has
attained the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
without any specific additional controls of NH3 and VOC
emissions from any sources in the Area.
    Precursors in subpart 4 are specifically regulated under the
provisions of section 189(e), which requires, with important
exceptions, control requirements for major stationary sources of
PM10 precursors.\9\ Under subpart 1 and EPA's prior
implementation rule, all major stationary sources of PM2.5
precursors were subject to regulation, with the

exception of NH3 and VOC. Thus EPA must address here whether
additional controls of NH3 and VOC from major stationary
sources are required under section 189(e) of subpart 4 in order to
redesignate the Lancaster Area for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. As explained subsequently, EPA does not believe
that any additional controls of NH3 and VOC are required in
the context of this redesignation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Under either subpart 1 or subpart 4, for purposes of
demonstrating attainment as expeditiously as practicable, a state is
required to evaluate all economically and technologically feasible
control measures for direct PM emissions and precursor emissions,
and adopt those measures that are deemed reasonably available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the General Preamble, EPA discusses its approach to implementing
section 189(e). See 57 FR 13538-13542. With regard to precursor
regulation under section 189(e), the General Preamble explicitly stated
that control of VOC under other CAA requirements may suffice to relieve
a state from the need to adopt precursor controls under section 189(e).
See 57 FR 13542. EPA in this rulemaking action, proposes to determine
that the Pennsylvania SIP revision has met the provisions of section
189(e) with respect to NH3 and VOC as precursors. These
proposed determinations are based on EPA's findings that: (1) The
Lancaster Area contains no major stationary sources of NH3;
and (2) existing major stationary sources of VOC are adequately
controlled under other provisions of the CAA regulating the ozone
NAAQS.\10\ In the alternative, EPA proposes to determine that, under
the express exception provisions of section 189(e), and in the context
of the redesignation of the Area, which is attaining the 1997 annual
and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, at present NH3
and VOC precursors from major stationary sources do not contribute
significantly to levels exceeding the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS in the Area. See 57 FR 13539-42.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Area has reduced VOC emissions through the
implementation of various control programs including VOC Reasonably
Available Control Technology (RACT) regulations and various on-road
and non-road motor vehicle control programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA notes that its 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule
provisions in 40 CFR 51.1002 were not directed at evaluation of
PM2.5 precursors in the context of redesignation, but at SIP
plans and control measures required to bring a nonattainment area into
attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. By contrast,
redesignation to attainment primarily requires the nonattainment area
to have already attained due to permanent and enforceable emission
reductions, and to demonstrate that controls in place can continue to
maintain the standard. Thus, even if we regard the D.C. Circuit Court's
January 4, 2013 decision as calling for ``presumptive regulation'' of
NH3 and VOC for PM2.5 under the attainment
planning provisions of subpart 4, those provisions in and of themselves
do not require additional controls of these precursors for an area that
already qualifies for redesignation. Nor does EPA believe that
requiring Pennsylvania to address precursors differently than it has
already would result in a substantively different outcome.
    Although, as EPA has emphasized, its consideration here of
precursor requirements under subpart 4 is in the context of a
redesignation to attainment, EPA's existing interpretation of subpart 4
requirements with respect to precursors in attainment plans for
PM10 contemplates that states may develop attainment plans
that regulate only those precursors that are necessary for purposes of
attainment in the area in question, i.e., states may determine that
only certain precursors need be regulated for attainment and control
purposes.\11\ Courts have upheld this approach to the requirements of
subpart 4 for PM10.\12\ EPA believes that application of
this approach to PM2.5 precursors under subpart 4 is
reasonable. Because the Area has already attained the 1997 annual and
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS with its current approach to
regulation of PM2.5 precursors, EPA believes that it is
reasonable to conclude in the context of this redesignation that there
is no need to revisit an attainment control strategy with respect to
the treatment of precursors. Even if the D.C. Circuit Court's decision
is construed to impose an obligation, in evaluating this redesignation
request, to consider additional precursors under subpart 4, it would
not affect EPA's approval here of Pennsylvania's request for
redesignation of the Lancaster Area for the 1997 annual and the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In the context of a redesignation,
Pennsylvania has shown that the Area has attained the standards.
Moreover, Pennsylvania has shown, and EPA proposes to determine, that
attainment of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS in this Area is due to permanent and enforceable emission
reductions on all precursors necessary to provide for continued
attainment of the standards. See Section V.A.3 of this rulemaking
action. It follows logically that no further control of additional
precursors is necessary. Accordingly, EPA does not view the January 4,
2013 decision of the D.C. Circuit Court as precluding redesignation of
the Area to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See, e.g., ``Approval and Promulgation of Implementation
Plans for California--San Joaquin Valley PM10
Nonattainment Area; Serious Area Plan for Nonattainment of the 24-
Hour and Annual PM10 Standards,'' (69 FR 30006, May 26,
2004) (approving a PM10 attainment plan that impose
controls on direct PM10 and NOX emissions and
did not impose controls on SO2, VOC, or NH3
emissions).
    \12\ See, e.g., Assoc. of Irritated Residents v. EPA et al., 423
F.3d 989 (9th Cir. 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In summary, even if, prior to submitting its April 30, 2014
redesignation request submittal or subsequent to such submission and
prior to December 31, 2014, Pennsylvania was required to address
precursors for the Area under subpart 4 rather than under subpart 1, as
interpreted in EPA's remanded 1997 PM2.5 Implementation
Rule, EPA would still conclude that the Area had met all applicable
requirements for purposes of redesignation in accordance with section
107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v) of the CAA.

V. EPA's Analysis of Pennsylvania's Submittal

    EPA is proposing several rulemaking actions for the Lancaster Area:
(1) To redesignate the Lancaster Area to attainment for the 1997 annual
and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS; (2) to approve into the
Pennsylvania SIP the associated maintenance plan for both the 1997
annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS; and (3) to approve
the 2007 comprehensive emissions inventory into the Pennsylvania SIP to
satisfy the requirements of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA for the Area
for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, which
is one of the CAA criteria for redesignation. EPA's proposed approval
of the redesignation request and maintenance plan for the 1997 annual
and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS are based upon EPA's
determination that the Area continues to attain both standards, which
EPA is proposing in this rulemaking action, and that all other
redesignation criteria have been met for the Area. In addition, EPA is
proposing to approve the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and
NOX MVEBs included in the maintenance plan for the Area for
transportation conformity purposes. The following is a description of
how Pennsylvania's April 30, 2014 submittal satisfies the requirements
of the CAA including specifically section 107(d)(3)(E) for the 1997
annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.

A. Redesignation Request

1. Attainment
    On September 25, 2009 (74 FR 48863) and July 29, 2011 (76 FR
45424), EPA determined that the Lancaster Area

attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS based on quality-
assured and certified ambient air monitoring data for 2006-2008 and
attained by its applicable attainment date of April 5, 2010 based on
quality-assured and certified ambient air quality monitoring data for
2007-2009, respectively. In a separate rulemaking action dated March
29, 2012 (77 FR 18922), EPA determined that the Lancaster Area attained
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, based on quality-assured and
certified ambient air quality monitoring data for 2008-2010. The basis
and effect of these determinations of attainment for both the 1997 and
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS were discussed in the notices of the
proposed (74 FR 38158 (July 31, 2009) and 77 FR 2941 (January 20,
2012), respectively) and final (74 FR 48863 and 77 FR 18922,
respectively) rulemakings which determined the Area attained the 1997
annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, respectively.
    EPA has reviewed the ambient air quality PM2.5
monitoring data in the Lancaster Area, consistent with the requirements
contained in 40 CFR part 50, and recorded in EPA's Air Quality System
(AQS), including quality-assured, quality-controlled, and state-
certified data for the monitoring periods 2007-2009, 2008-2010, 2009-
2011, 2010-2012, and 2011-2013. This data, provided in Tables 1 and 2,
shows that the Area continues to attain the 1997 annual and 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS.

          Table 1--Lancaster Area's Annual Design Values for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 Standard for the 2007-2013 Monitoring Periods, in [mu]g/m\3\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Monitor ID No.                               2007-2009        2008-2010        2009-2011        2010-2012        2011-2013
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
42-071-0007........................................................            13.8             12.6             12.0             12.1             12.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

         Table 2--Lancaster Area's 24-Hour Design Values for the 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 Standard for the 2007-2013 Monitoring Periods, in [mu]g/m\3\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Monitor ID No.                               2007-2009        2008-2010        2009-2011        2010-2012        2011-2013
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
42-071-0007........................................................              35               33               31               31               31
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's review of the monitoring data from 2007 through 2013 supports
EPA's previous determinations that the Area has attained the 1997
annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, and that the Area
continues to attain both standards. In addition, as discussed
subsequently, with respect to the maintenance plan, Pennsylvania has
committed to continue monitoring ambient PM2.5
concentrations in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. Thus, based upon
analysis of currently available data, EPA is proposing to determine
that the Lancaster Area continues to attain the 1997 annual and 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
2. The Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and
Subpart 1 of the CAA and Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k)
    In accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v), the SIP revision for
the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for the
Lancaster Area must be fully approved under section 110(k) and all the
requirements applicable to the Lancaster Area under section 110 of the
CAA (general SIP requirements) and part D of Title I of the CAA (SIP
requirements for nonattainment areas) must be met.
a. Section 110 General SIP Requirements
    Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the CAA 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: (1) Submittal
of a SIP that has been adopted by the state after reasonable public
notice and hearing; (2) provisions for establishment and operation of
appropriate procedures needed to monitor ambient air quality; (3)
implementation of a minor source permit program and provisions for the
implementation of part C requirements (PSD); (4) provisions for the
implementation of part D requirements for NSR permit programs; (5)
provisions for air pollution modeling; and (6) provisions for public
and local agency participation in planning and emission control rule
development.
    Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA 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
for various NAAQS, EPA has required certain states to establish
programs to address transport of air pollutants in accordance with
EPA's Finding of Significant Contribution and Rulemaking for Certain
States in the Ozone Transport Assessment Group Region for Purposes of
Reducing Regional Transport of Ozone (63 FR 57356, October 27, 1998),
also known as the NOX SIP Call; amendments to the
NOX SIP Call (64 FR 26298, May 14, 1999 and 65 FR 11222,
March 2, 2000), CAIR (70 FR 25162, May 12, 2005) and CSAPR. However,
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 classification 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, EPA does not believe that these requirements
are applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation.
    In addition, EPA believes that the other section 110(a)(2) 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 Lancaster Area will still be subject to
these requirements after it is redesignated. EPA concludes that the
section 110(a)(2) 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, and that
section 110(a)(2) elements not linked to the area's

nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation.
This approach 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). For
additional discussion on this issue, see the Cincinnati, Ohio
redesignation (65 FR at 37890, June 19, 2000) and the Pittsburgh-Beaver
Valley, Pennsylvania redesignation (66 FR at 53099, October 19, 2001).
    EPA has reviewed the Pennsylvania SIP and has concluded that it
meets the general SIP requirements under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA
to the extent they are applicable for purposes of redesignation. EPA
has previously approved provisions of Pennsylvania's SIP addressing
section 110(a)(2) requirements, including provisions addressing
PM2.5. See 77 FR 58955 September 25, 2012 (approving
infrastructure submittals for 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS).
These requirements are, however, statewide requirements that are not
linked to the PM2.5 nonattainment status of the Lancaster
Area. Therefore, EPA believes that these SIP elements are not
applicable requirements for purposes of review of the Commonwealth's
PM2.5 redesignation request.
b. Subpart 1 Requirements
    Subpart 1 sets forth the basic nonattainment plan requirements
applicable to PM2.5 nonattainment areas. Under section 172,
states with nonattainment areas must submit plans providing for timely
attainment and must meet a variety of other requirements.
    EPA's longstanding interpretation of the nonattainment planning
requirements of section 172 is that once an area is attaining the
NAAQS, those requirements are not ``applicable'' for purposes of
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and therefore need not be approved into the
SIP before EPA can redesignate the area. In the 1992 General Preamble
for Implementation of Title I, EPA set forth its interpretation of
applicable requirements for purposes of evaluating redesignation
requests when an area is attaining a standard. See 57 FR 13498, 13564
(April 16, 1992). EPA noted that the requirements for RFP and other
measures designed to provide for attainment do not apply in evaluating
redesignation requests because those nonattainment planning
requirements ``have no meaning'' for an area that has already attained
the standard. Id. This interpretation was also set forth in the 1992
Calcagni Memorandum. EPA's understanding of section 172 also forms the
basis of its Clean Data Policy, which was articulated with regard to
PM2.5 in 40 CFR 51.1004(c), and suspends a state's
obligation to submit most of the attainment planning requirements that
would otherwise apply, including an attainment demonstration and
planning SIPs to provide for RFP, RACM, and contingency measures under
section 172(c)(9).\13\ Courts have upheld EPA's interpretation of
section 172(c)(1)'s ``reasonably available'' control measures and
control technology as meaning only those controls that advance
attainment, which precludes the need to require additional measures
where an area is already attaining. NRDC v. EPA, 571 F.3d 1245, 1252
(D.C. Cir. 2009); Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d 155, 162 (D.C. Cir.
2002); Sierra Club v. EPA, 314 F.3d 735, 744 (5th Cir. 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ This regulation was promulgated as part of the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS implementation rule that was subsequently
challenged and remanded in NRDC v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir.
2013), as discussed in Section IV.B of this rulemaking. However, the
Clean Data Policy portion of the implementation rule was not at
issue in that case.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, because attainment has been reached for the 1997 annual
and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in the Lancaster Area (see
September 25, 2009 (74 FR 48863) and March 29, 2012 (77 FR 18922)), no
additional measures are needed to provide for attainment, and section
172(c)(1) requirements for an attainment demonstration and RACM are no
longer considered to be applicable for purposes of redesignation as
long as the Area continues to attain both standards until
redesignation. Section 172(c)(2)'s requirement that nonattainment plans
contain provisions promoting reasonable further progress toward
attainment is also not relevant for purposes of redesignation because
EPA has determined that the Lancaster Area has monitored attainment of
the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In addition,
because the Lancaster Area has attained the 1997 annual and 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS and is no longer subject to an RFP
requirement, the requirement to submit the section 172(c)(9)
contingency measures is not applicable for purposes of redesignation.
Section 172(c)(6) requires the SIP to contain control measures
necessary to provide for attainment of the NAAQS. Because attainment
has been reached, no additional measures are needed to provide for
attainment.
    The requirement under section 172(c)(3) of the CAA was not
suspended by EPA's clean data determination for the 1997 annual and
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and is the only remaining
requirement under section 172 to be considered for purposes of
redesignation of the Area. Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires
submission and approval of a comprehensive, accurate, and current
inventory of actual emissions. To satisfy the 172(c)(3) requirement for
the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS,
Pennsylvania's April 30, 2014 redesignation request and maintenance
plan for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
contains a 2007 comprehensive emissions inventory. The 2007 emissions
inventory was the most current accurate and comprehensive emissions
inventory of PM2.5, NOX, SO2, VOC, and
NH3 for the Area when the Area attained the 1997 annual and
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Thus, as part of this rulemaking
action, EPA is proposing to approve Pennsylvania's 2007 comprehensive
emissions inventory for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS as satisfying the requirement of section
172(c)(3) of the CAA for both standards. Final approval of the 2007
base year emissions inventory will satisfy the emissions inventory
requirement under section 172(c)(3) of the CAA for the 1997 annual and
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The 2007 comprehensive
emissions inventory addresses the general source categories of point
sources, area sources, on-road mobile sources, and non-road mobile
sources. A summary of the 2007 comprehensive emissions inventory is
shown in Table 3. For more information on EPA's analysis of the 2007
emissions inventory, see the TSD prepared by the EPA Region III Office
of Air Monitoring and Analysis dated February 5, 2015, ``Technical
Support Document (TSD) for the Redesignation Request and Maintenance
Plan for the Lancaster, PA 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 Nonattainment
Area'' (Inventory TSD), available in the docket for this rulemaking
action at www.regulations.gov. See Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0050.

                     Table 3--2007 Emissions for the Lancaster Area, in Tons per Year (tpy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Sector                    PM2.5            SO2             NOX             VOC             NH3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................             254             102           1,147           2,691               8
Area............................           2,691           3,030           1,827           6,675          15,551
Onroad..........................             480             102          13,895           5,529             207
Nonroad.........................             290             148           3,173           4,627               3
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................           3,715           3,382          20,041          19,522          15,769
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 172(c)(4) of the CAA requires the identification and
quantification of allowable emissions for major new and modified
stationary sources in an area, and section 172(c)(5) requires source
permits for the construction and operation of new and modified major
stationary sources anywhere in the nonattainment area. EPA has
determined that, since PSD requirements will apply after redesignation,
areas being redesignated need not comply with the requirement that a
nonattainment NSR program be approved prior to redesignation, provided
that the area demonstrates maintenance of the NAAQS without part D NSR.
A more detailed rationale for this view is described in a memorandum
from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated
October 14, 1994, entitled, ``Part D New Source Review Requirements for
Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.'' Nevertheless,
Pennsylvania currently has an approved NSR program codified in
Pennsylvania's regulations at 25 Pa. Code 127.201 et seq. See 77 FR
41276 (July 13, 2012) (approving NSR program into the SIP). See also 49
FR 33127 (August 21, 1984) (approving Pennsylvania's PSD program which
incorporates by reference the Federal PSD program at 40 CFR 52.21).
However, Pennsylvania's PSD program will become effective in the
Lancaster Area upon redesignation to attainment.
    Section 172(c)(7) of the CAA requires the SIP to meet the
applicable provisions of section 110(a)(2). As noted previously, EPA
believes the Pennsylvania SIP meets the requirements of section
110(a)(2) that are applicable for purposes of redesignation.
    Section 175A requires a state seeking redesignation to attainment
to submit a SIP revision to provide for the maintenance of the NAAQS in
the area ``for at least 10 years after the redesignation.'' On April
30, 2014, in conjunction with its request to redesignate the Lancaster
Area to attainment status, Pennsylvania submitted a SIP revision to
provide for maintenance of the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS in the Lancaster Area for at least 10 years
after redesignation, throughout 2025. Pennsylvania is requesting that
EPA approve the maintenance plan to meet the requirement of section
175A of the CAA for both NAAQS. Once approved, the maintenance plan for
the Area will ensure that the SIP for Pennsylvania meets the
requirements of the CAA regarding maintenance of the 1997 annual and
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for the Area. EPA's analysis of the
maintenance plan is provided in Section V.B. of this proposed
rulemaking action.
    Section 176(c) of the CAA 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 that are developed, funded or approved under
Title 23 of the United States Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act
(transportation conformity) as well as to all other Federally supported
or funded projects (general conformity). State transportation
conformity SIP revisions must be consistent with Federal conformity
regulations relating to consultation, enforcement and enforceability
which EPA promulgated pursuant to its authority under the CAA. EPA
approved Pennsylvania's transportation conformity SIP requirements on
April 29, 2009 (74 FR 19541).
    EPA interprets the conformity SIP requirements as not applying for
purposes of evaluating a redesignation request under CAA section 107(d)
because 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 (6th Cir. 2001) (upholding
this interpretation) and 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995) (discussing
Tampa, Florida).
    Thus, for purposes of redesignating to attainment the Lancaster
Area for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS,
EPA proposes that upon final approval of the 2007 comprehensive
emissions inventory as proposed in this rulemaking action, Pennsylvania
will meet all the applicable SIP requirements under part D of Title I
of the CAA for purposes of redesignating the Area to attainment for
both the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
c. The Lancaster Area has a Fully Approved Applicable SIP Under Section
110(k) of the CAA
    Upon final approval of the 2007 comprehensive emissions inventory
as proposed in this rulemaking action, EPA will have fully approved all
applicable requirements of Pennsylvania's SIP for the Lancaster Area
for purposes of redesignation to attainment for the 1997 annual and
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in accordance with section 110(k)
of the CAA.
3. Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions
    For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii) requires EPA to determine that the air quality
improvement in the 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. Pennsylvania has calculated the change in
emissions between 2002, a year showing nonattainment for the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the Lancaster Area, and 2007, one of
the years for which the Lancaster Area monitored attainment for both
standards.
    A summary of the emissions reductions of PM2.5,
NOX, SO2, VOC, and NH3 from 2002 to
2007 in the Lancaster Area, submitted by PADEP, is provided in Table 4.
For more information on EPA's analysis of the 2007 emissions
inventories, see EPA's Inventory TSD, dated February 5, 2015, available
in the docket for this rulemaking action at www.regulations.gov.

                   Table 4--Emission Reductions From 2002 to 2007 in the Lancaster Area (tpy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Percent
                                     Sector            2002            2007        Net reduction  reduction 2002-
                                                                                2002-2007         2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5.........................  Point...........             380             254             127              33
                                Area............           3,612           2,691             922              26
                                On-road.........             541             480              60              11
                                Non-road........             322             290              -2              -1
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Total........           4,856           3,715           1,140              23
                                                 ===============================================================
NOX...........................  Point...........           1,368           1,147             221              16
                                Area............           1,739           1,827             -87              -5
                                On-road.........          17,466          13,895           3,572              20
                                Non-road........           4,001           3,173             828              21
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Total........          24,575          20,041           4,534              18
                                                 ===============================================================
SO2...........................  Point...........             498             102             395              79
                                Area............           2,735           3,030            -295             -11
                                On-road.........             362             102             260              72
                                Non-road........             295             148             147              50
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Total........           3,890           3,382             508              13
                                                 ===============================================================
VOC...........................  Point...........           3,188           2,691             497              16
                                Area............           9,887           6,675           3,212              32
                                On-road.........           6,481           5,529             953              15
                                Non-road........           5,009           4,627             382               8
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Total........          24,566          19,522           5,044              21
                                                 ===============================================================
NH3...........................  Point...........              12               8               4              33
                                Area............          15,994          15,551             444               3
                                On-road.........             222             207              15               7
                                Non-road........               3               3               0               0
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Total........          16,231          15,769             462               3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The reduction in emissions and the corresponding improvement in air
quality from 2002 to 2007 for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS, respectively, in the Lancaster Area can be
attributed to a number of regulatory control measures that have been
implemented in the Area and contributing areas in recent years.
a. Federal Measures Implemented
    Reductions in PM2.5 precursor emissions have occurred
statewide and in upwind states as a result of Federal emission control
measures, with additional emission reductions expected to occur in the
future.
Control of NOX and SO2
    PM2.5 concentrations in the Lancaster Area are impacted
by the transport of sulfates and nitrates, and the Area's air quality
is strongly affected by regulation of SO2 and NOX
emissions from power plants.
    NOX SIP Call--On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA issued the
NOX SIP Call requiring the District of Columbia and 22
states to reduce emissions of NOX, a precursor to ozone
pollution.\14\ Affected states were required to comply with Phase I of
the SIP Call beginning in 2004 and Phase II beginning in 2007. Emission
reductions resulting from regulations developed in response to the
NOX SIP Call are permanent and enforceable. By imposing an
emissions cap regionally, the NOX SIP Call reduced
NOX emissions from large EGUs and large non-EGUs such as
industrial boilers, internal combustion engines, and cement kilns. In
response to the NOX SIP Call, Pennsylvania adopted its
NOX Budget Trading Program regulations for EGUs and large
industrial boilers, with emission reductions starting in May 2003.
Pennsylvania's NOX Budget Trading Program regulation was
approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on August 21, 2001 (66 FR 43795). To
meet other requirements of the NOX SIP Call, Pennsylvania
adopted NOX control regulations for cement plants and
internal combustion engines, with emission reductions starting in May
2005. These regulations were approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on
September 29, 2006 (71 FR 57428).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Although the NOX SIP Call was issued in order to
address ozone pollution, reductions of NOX as a result of
that program have also impacted PM2.5 pollution, for
which NOX is also a precursor emission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CAIR--As previously noted, CAIR (70 FR 25162, May 12, 2005) created
regional cap-and-trade programs to reduce SO2 and
NOX emissions in 27 eastern states, including Pennsylvania.
EPA approved the Commonwealth's CAIR regulation, codified in 25 Pa.
Code Chapter 145, Subchapter D, into the Pennsylvania SIP on December
10, 2009 (74 FR 65446). In 2009, the CAIR ozone season NOX
trading program superseded the NOX Budget Trading Program,
although the emission reduction obligations of the NOX SIP
Call were not rescinded. See 40 CFR 51.121(r) and 51.123(aa). EPA
promulgated CSAPR to replace CAIR as an emission trading program for
EGUs. As discussed previously, pursuant to the D.C. Circuit Court's
October 23, 2014 Order, the stay of CSAPR has been lifted and
implementation of CSAPR commenced in January 2015. EPA expects that the
implementation of CSAPR will preserve the reductions achieved by CAIR
and

result in additional SO2 and NOX emission
reductions throughout the maintenance period.
Tier 2 Emission Standards for Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur Standards
    These emission control requirements result in lower NOX
emissions from new cars and light duty trucks, including sport utility
vehicles. The Federal rules were phased in between 2004 and 2009. EPA
estimated that, after phasing in the new requirements, the following
vehicle NOX emission reductions will have occurred
nationwide: Passenger cars (light duty vehicles) (77 percent); light
duty trucks, minivans, and sports utility vehicles (86 percent); and
larger sports utility vehicles, vans, and heavier trucks (69 to 95
percent). Some of the emissions reductions resulting from new vehicle
standards occurred during the 2008-2010 attainment period; however,
additional reductions will continue to occur throughout the maintenance
period as new vehicles replace older vehicles. EPA expects fleet wide
average emissions to decline by similar percentages as new vehicles
replace older vehicles.
Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Rule
    EPA issued the Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Rule in July 2000. This
rule included standards limiting the sulfur content of diesel fuel,
which went into effect in 2004. A second phase took effect in 2007
which reduced PM2.5 emissions from heavy-duty highway
engines and further reduced the highway diesel fuel sulfur content to
15 parts per million (ppm). Standards for gasoline engines were phased
in starting in 2008. The total program is estimated to achieve a 90
percent reduction in direct PM2.5 emissions and a 95 percent
reduction in NOX emissions for new engines using low sulfur
diesel fuel.
Nonroad Diesel Rule
    On June 29, 2004 (69 FR 38958), EPA promulgated the Nonroad Diesel
Rule for large nonroad diesel engines, such as those used in
construction, agriculture, and mining, to be phased in between 2008 and
2014. The rule phased in requirements for reducing the sulfur content
of diesel used in nonroad diesel engines. The reduction in sulfur
content prevents damage to the more advanced emission control systems
needed to meet the engine standards. It will also reduce fine
particulate emissions from diesel engines. The combined engine
standards and the sulfur in fuel reductions will reduce NOX
and PM emissions from large nonroad engines by over 90 percent,
compared to current nonroad engines using higher sulfur content diesel.
Nonroad Large Spark-Ignition Engine and Recreational Engine Standards
    In November 2002, EPA promulgated emission standards for groups of
previously unregulated nonroad engines. These engines include large
spark-ignition engines such as those used in forklifts and airport
ground-service equipment; recreational vehicles using spark-ignition
engines such as off-highway motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles, and
snowmobiles; and recreational marine diesel engines. Emission standards
from large spark-ignition engines were implemented in two tiers, with
Tier 1 starting in 2004 and Tier 2 in 2007. Recreational vehicle
emission standards are being phased in from 2006 through 2012. Marine
Diesel engine standards were phased in from 2006 through 2009. With
full implementation of all of the nonroad spark-ignition engine and
recreational engine standards, an overall 80 percent reduction in
NOX is expected by 2020. Some of these emission reductions
occurred by the 2002-2007 attainment period and additional emission
reductions will occur during the maintenance period as the fleet turns
over.
Federal Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
    As required by the CAA, EPA developed Maximum Available Control
Technology (MACT) Standards to regulate emissions of hazardous air
pollutants from a published list of industrial sources referred to as
``source categories.'' The MACT standards have been adopted and
incorporated by reference in Section 6.6 of Pennsylvania's Air
Pollution Control Act and implementing regulations in 25 Pa. Code Sec.
127.35 and are also included in Federally enforceable permits issued by
PADEP for affected sources. The Industrial/Commercial/Institutional
(ICI) Boiler MACT standards (69 FR 55217, September 13, 2004, and 76 FR
15554, February 21, 2011) are estimated to reduce emissions of PM,
SO2, and VOCs from major source boilers and process heaters
nationwide. Also, the Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE)
MACT will reduce NOX and PM emissions from engines located
at facilities such as pipeline compressor stations, chemical and
manufacturing plants, and power plants.
b. State Measures
Heavy-Duty Diesel Emissions Control Program
    In 2002, Pennsylvania adopted the Heavy-Duty Diesel Emissions
Control Program for model years starting in May 2004. The program
incorporates California standards by reference and required model year
2005 and beyond heavy-duty diesel highway engines to be certified to
the California standards, which were more stringent than the Federal
standards for model years 2005 and 2006. After model year 2006,
Pennsylvania required implementation of the Federal standards that
applied to model years 2007 and beyond, discussed in the Federal
measures section of this proposed rulemaking action. This program
reduced emissions of NOX statewide.
Vehicle Emission Inspection/Maintenance (I/M) Program
    Pennsylvania's Vehicle Emission I/M program was expanded to the
Lancaster area in early 2004 and applies to model year 1975 and newer
gasoline-powered vehicles that are 9,000 pounds and under. The program,
approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on October 6, 2005 (70 FR 58313),
consists of annual on-board diagnostics and gas cap test for model year
1996 vehicles and newer, and an annual visual inspection of pollution
control devices and gas cap test for model year 1995 vehicles and
older. This program reduces emissions of NOX from affected
vehicles.
Consumer Products Regulation
    Pennsylvania regulation ``Chapter 130, Subchapter B. Consumer
Products'' established, effective January 1, 2005, VOC emission limits
for numerous categories of consumer products, and applies statewide to
any person who sells, supplies, offers for sale, or manufactures such
consumer products on or after January 1, 2005 for use in Pennsylvania.
It was approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on December 8, 2004 (69 FR
70895).
Adhesives, Sealants, Primers and Solvents Regulation
    Pennsylvania adopted a regulation in 2010 to control VOC emissions
from adhesives, sealants, primers and solvents. This regulation was
approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on September 26, 2012 (77 FR 59090).
    Based on the information summarized above, Pennsylvania has
adequately demonstrated that the improvements in air quality in the
Lancaster Area are due to permanent and enforceable emissions
reductions. The reductions result from

Federal and State requirements and regulation of precursors within
Pennsylvania that affect the Lancaster Area.

B. Maintenance Plan

    On April 30, 2014, PADEP submitted a combined maintenance plan for
the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, as required by
section 175A of the CAA. EPA's analysis for proposing approval of the
maintenance plan is provided in this section.
1. Attainment Emissions Inventories
    An attainment inventory is comprised of the emissions during the
time period associated with the monitoring data showing attainment.
PADEP determined that the appropriate attainment inventory year for the
maintenance plan for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS is 2007,
one of the years in the periods during which the Lancaster Area
monitored attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. PADEP
determined that the appropriate attainment inventory year for the
maintenance plan for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS is 2007,
one of the years in the periods during which the Lancaster Area
monitored attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The
2007 inventory included in the maintenance plan contains primary
PM2.5 emissions (including condensables), SO2,
NOX, VOC, and NH3.
    In its redesignation request and maintenance plan for the 1997
annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, PADEP described the
methods used for developing its 2007 inventory. EPA reviewed the
procedures used to develop the inventory and found them to be
reasonable. EPA has reviewed the documentation provided by PADEP and
found the 2007 emissions inventory submitted with the maintenance plan
to be approvable. For more information on EPA's analysis of the 2007
emissions inventory, see EPA's Inventory TSD, dated February 5, 2015,
available in the docket for this rulemaking action at
www.regulations.gov.
2. Maintenance Demonstration
    Section 175A requires a state seeking redesignation to attainment
to submit a SIP revision to provide for the maintenance of the NAAQS in
the area ``for at least 10 years after the redesignation.'' EPA has
interpreted this as a showing of maintenance ``for a period of ten
years following redesignation.'' The Federal and State measures
described in Section V.A.3 of this proposed rulemaking action
demonstrate that the reductions in emissions from point, area, and
mobile sources in the Area has occurred and will continue to occur
through 2025. In addition, the following State and Federal regulations
and programs ensure the continuing decline of SO2,
NOX, PM2.5, and VOC emissions in the Area during
the maintenance period and beyond:
Non-EGUs Previously Covered Under the NOX SIP Call
    Pennsylvania established NOX emission limits for the
large industrial boilers that were previously subject to the
NOX SIP Call, but were not subject to CAIR. For these units,
Pennsylvania established an allowable ozone season NOX limit
based on the unit's previous ozone season's heat input. A combined
NOX ozone season emissions cap of 3,418 tons applies for all
of these units.
CSAPR (August 8, 2011, 76 FR 48208)
    EPA promulgated CSAPR to replace CAIR as an emission trading
program for EGUs. As discussed previously, implementation of CSAPR
commenced in January 2015. EPA expects that the implementation of CSAPR
will preserve the reductions achieved by CAIR and result in additional
SO2 and NOX emission reductions throughout the
maintenance period.
Regulation of Cement Kilns
    On July 19, 2011 (76 FR 52558), EPA approved amendments to 25 Pa.
Code Chapter 145 Subchapter C to further reduce NOX
emissions from cement kilns. The amendments established NOX
emission rate limits for long wet kilns, long dry kilns, and preheater
and precalciner kilns that are lower by 35 percent to 63 percent from
the previous limit of 6 pounds of NOX per ton of clinker
that applied to all kilns. The amendments were effective on April 15,
2011.
Stationary Source Regulations
    Pennsylvania regulation 25 Pa. Code Chapter 130, Subchapter D for
Adhesives, Sealers, Primers, and Solvents was approved into the
Pennsylvania SIP on September 26, 2012 (77 FR 59090). The regulation
established VOC content limits for various categories of adhesives,
sealants, primers, and solvent, and became applicable on January 1,
2012.
    Amendments to Pennsylvania regulation 25 Pa. Code Chapter 130,
Subchapter B established, effective January 1, 2009, new or more
stringent VOC standards for consumer products. The amendments were
approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on October 18, 2010 (75 FR 63717).
Pennsylvania's Clean Vehicle Program
    The Pennsylvania Clean Vehicles Program (formerly, New Motor
Vehicle Control Program) incorporates by reference the California Low
Emission Vehicle program (CA LEVII), although it allowed automakers to
comply with the NLEV program as an alternative to this program until
Model Year (MY) 2006. The Clean Vehicles Program, codified in 25 Pa.
Code Chapter 126, Subchapter D, was modified to require CA LEVII to
apply to MY 2008 and beyond, and was approved into the Pennsylvania SIP
on January 24, 2012 (77 FR 3386). The Clean Vehicles Program
incorporates by reference the emission control standards of CA LEVII,
which, among other requirements, reduces emissions of NOX by
requiring that passenger car emission standards and fleet average
emission standards also apply to light duty vehicles. Model year 2008
and newer passenger cars and light duty trucks are required to be
certified for emissions by the California Air Resource Board (CARB), in
order to be sold, leased, offered for sale or lease, imported,
delivered, purchased, rented, acquired, received, titled or registered
in Pennsylvania. In addition, manufacturers are required to demonstrate
that the California fleet average standard is met based on the number
of new light-duty vehicles delivered for sale in the Commonwealth. The
Commonwealth's submittal for the January 24, 2012 rulemaking projected
that, by 2025, the program will achieve approximately 75 tons more
NOX reductions than Tier II for the Lancaster Area.
    Two Pennsylvania regulations--the Diesel-Powered Motor Vehicle
Idling Act (August 1, 2011, 76 FR 45705) and the Outdoor Wood-Fired
Boiler regulation (September 20, 2011, 76 FR 58114)--were not included
in the projection inventories, but may also assist in maintaining the
standard. Also, the Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards
(79 FR 23414, April 29, 2014) establishes more stringent vehicle
emissions standards and will reduce the sulfur content of gasoline
beginning in 2017. The fuel standard will achieve NOX
reductions by further increasing the effectiveness of vehicle emission
controls for both existing and new vehicles.
    The State and Federal regulations and programs described above
ensure the continuing decline of SO2, NOX,
PM2.5, and VOC emissions in the Area during the maintenance
period and beyond. A summary of the projected reductions from these
measures from 2007 to 2025 is shown in Table 5. Table 5

incorporates the expected emissions from potential emissions increases
from Emission Reduction Credits (ERCs), which are also included in
Tables 6a-6e.

                  Table 5--Emission Reductions (Tons) From 2007 to 2025 Due to Control Measures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       PM2.5            NOX             SO2             VOC             NH3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................             -18            -238             -18            -355              -3
Area............................              81             122           1,264             249          -2,821
On-Road.........................             295           9,447              63           3,661              63
Non-Road........................             158           1,862             142           2,388              -1
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Totals......................             516          11,194           1,451           5,942          -2,762
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Where the emissions inventory method of showing maintenance is
used, its purpose is to show that emissions during the maintenance
period will not increase over the attainment year inventory. See 1992
Calcagni Memorandum, pages 9-10. For a demonstration of maintenance,
emissions inventories are required to be projected to future dates to
assess the influence of future growth and controls; however, the
demonstration need not be based on modeling. See Wall v. EPA, supra;
Sierra Club v. EPA, supra. See also 66 FR 53099-53100 and 68 FR 25430-
32. PADEP uses projection inventories to show that the Lancaster Area
will remain in attainment and developed projection inventories for an
interim year of 2017 and a maintenance plan end year of 2025 to show
that future emissions of NOX, SO2,
PM2.5, and VOC will remain at or below the attainment year
2007 attainment-level emissions levels, for the 1997 annual and 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, respectively, throughout the Lancaster
Area through the year 2025. Although emissions of NH3 are
projected to increase from 2007 to 2017 and from 2007 to 2025, the
increase will not affect the Area's ability to maintain the standard
because such increases are more than compensated by the significant
reductions of the other precursors that are projected during the
maintenance period.
    EPA has reviewed the documentation provided by PADEP for developing
annual 2017 and 2025 emissions inventories for the Lancaster portion of
the Area. See Appendix C-2 and C-3 of Pennsylvania's submittal. EPA has
determined that the 2017 and 2025 projected emissions inventories
provided by PADEP are approvable. For more information on EPA's
analysis of the emissions inventories, see EPA's Inventory TSD, dated
February 5, 2015 available in the docket for this rulemaking action at
www.regulations.gov.
    Tables 6a through 6e provide a summary of the inventories in tpy
for the 2007 attainment year, as compared to projected inventories for
the 2017 interim year and the 2025 maintenance plan end year for the
Area.

                                 Table 6a--Comparison of 2007, 2017, and 2025 Emissions of PM2.5 for the Lancaster Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                          PM2.5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                2007-2017                       2007-2025
                                                                                ---------------------------------------------------------------
                 Sector                        2007            2017            2025                           Percent                         Percent
                                                                                Reduction       reduction       Reduction       reduction
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...................................             254             267             272             -13              -5             -18              -7
Area....................................           2,691           2,649           2,610              42               2              81               3
On-Road.................................             480             249             185             231              48             295              61
Non-Road................................             290             182             132             108              37             158              54
ERC.....................................  ..............               0               0  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................           3,715           3,348           3,200             368              10             516              14
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                  Table 6b--Comparison of 2007, 2017, and 2025 Emissions of NOX for the Lancaster Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           NOX
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                2007-2017                       2007-2025
                                                                                ---------------------------------------------------------------
                 Sector                        2007            2017            2025                           Percent                         Percent
                                                                                Reduction       reduction       Reduction       reduction
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...................................           1,147           1,314           1,383            -167             -15            -236             -21
Area....................................           1,827           1,702           1,704             125               7             123               7
On-Road.................................          13,895           6,916           4,447           6,979              50           9,448              68
Non-Road................................           3,173           1,775           1,310           1,398              44           1,863              59
ERC.....................................  ..............               2               2              -2  ..............              -2  ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................          20,041          11,710           8,847           8,333              42          11,196              56
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                  Table 6c--Comparison of 2007, 2017, and 2025 Emissions of SO2 for the Lancaster Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           SO2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                2007-2017                       2007-2025
                                                                                ---------------------------------------------------------------
                 Sector                        2007            2017            2025                           Percent                         Percent
                                                                                Reduction       reduction       Reduction       reduction
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...................................             102             115             120             -13             -13             -18             -18
Area....................................           3,030           2,449           1,766             581              19           1,264              42
On-Road.................................             102              37              39              65              64              63              62
Non-Road................................             148               5               5             143              97             143              97
ERC.....................................  ..............               0               0  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................           3,382           2,605           1,930             776              23           1,452              43
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                  Table 6d--Comparison of 2007, 2017, and 2025 Emissions of VOC for the Lancaster Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           VOC
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                2007-2017                       2007-2025
                                                                                ---------------------------------------------------------------
                 Sector                        2007            2017            2025                           Percent                         Percent
                                                                                Reduction       reduction       Reduction       reduction
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...................................           2,691           2,808           2,874            -117              -4            -183              -7
Area....................................           6,675           6,459           6,426             216               3             249               4
On-Road.................................           5,529           2,965           1,868           2,564              46           3,661              66
Non-Road................................           4,627           2,753           2,240           1,874              41           2,387              52
ERC.....................................  ..............             172             172  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................          19,522          15,157          13,580           4,537              23           6,114              31
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                  Table 6e--Comparison of 2007, 2017, and 2025 Emissions of NH3 for the Lancaster Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           NH3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                2007-2017                       2007-2025
                                                                                ---------------------------------------------------------------
                 Sector                        2007            2017            2025                           Percent                         Percent
                                                                                Reduction       reduction       Reduction       reduction
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...................................               8              10              11              -2             -25              -3             -38
Area....................................          15,551          17,152          18,372          -1,601             -10          -2,821             -18
On-Road.................................             207             148             144              59              29              63              30
Non-Road................................               3               4               4              -1             -33              -1             -33
ERC.....................................  ..............               0               0  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................          15,769          17,314          18,531          -1,545             -10          -2,762             -18
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As shown in Tables 6a-6b, the projected levels for
PM2.5, NOX, SO2, and VOC are under the
2007 attainment levels for each of these pollutants. While the
emissions of NH3 are projected to be higher than the 2007
inventory for this pollutant for both the interim year and the end-
year, the decreases in the other precursors, particularly the
significant reductions in NOX, more than compensate for the
increase, therefore, the increase in NH3 is not considered
to affect the Area's ability to maintain the NAAQS. The projected
emissions inventories show that the Area will continue to maintain the
1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS during the 10 year
maintenance period. Moreover, the modeling analysis conducted for the
Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
indicates that the annual PM2.5 design value for this Area
is expected to continue to decline through 2020. Given the significant
decrease in overall precursor emissions projected through 2025, it is
reasonable to conclude that monitored PM2.5 levels in this
area will also continue to decrease through 2025. Pennsylvania has
adequately demonstrated that the Area will continue to maintain the
1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
3. Monitoring Network
    Pennsylvania's maintenance plan includes a commitment by PADEP to
continue to operate its EPA-approved monitoring network, as necessary
to demonstrate ongoing compliance with the NAAQS. Pennsylvania
currently operates a PM2.5 monitor in the Lancaster Area. In
its April 30, 2014 submittal, Pennsylvania stated that it will consult
with EPA prior to making any necessary changes to the network and will
continue to operate the monitoring network in accordance with the
requirements of 40 CFR part 58.
4. Verification of Continued Attainment
    To provide for tracking of the emission levels in the Area, PADEP
will: (a) Evaluate annually the vehicle miles travelled (VMT) data and
the annual emissions reported from stationary sources to compare them
with the assumptions used in the maintenance plan; and (b) evaluate the
periodic emissions inventory for all PM2.5 precursors
prepared every three years in accordance with EPA's Air

Emissions Reporting Requirements (AERR) to determine whether there is
an exceedance of more than ten percent over the 2007 inventories. Also,
as noted in the previous subsection, PADEP will continue to operate its
monitoring system in accordance with 40 CFR 58 and remains obligated to
quality-assure monitoring data and enter all data into the AQS in
accordance with federal requirements. PADEP will use this data in
considering whether additional control measures are needed to assure
continuing attainment in the Area.
5. Contingency Measures
    The contingency plan provisions are designed to promptly correct
any violation of the 1997 annual and/or the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS that occurs in the Lancaster Area after
redesignation. Section 175A of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan
include such contingency measures as EPA deems necessary to ensure that
a 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).
    Pennsylvania's maintenance plan describes the procedures for the
adoption and implementation of contingency measures to reduce emissions
should a violation occur. Pennsylvania's contingency measures include a
first level response and a second level response. A first level
response is triggered when the annual mean PM2.5
concentration exceeds 15.5 [mu]g/m\3\ in a single calendar year within
the Area, when the 98th percentile 24-hour PM2.5
concentration exceeds 35.0 [mu]g/m\3\, or when the periodic emissions
inventory for the Area exceed the attainment year inventory (2007) by
more than ten percent. The first level response will consist of a study
to determine if the emissions trends show increasing concentrations of
PM2.5, and whether this trend is likely to continue. If it
is determined through the study that action is necessary to reverse a
trend of emissions increases, Pennsylvania will, as expeditiously as
possible, implement necessary and appropriate control measures to
reverse the trend.
    A second level response will be prompted if the two-year average of
the annual mean concentration exceeds 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ or if the 98th
percentile 24-hour PM2.5 concentration exceeds 35.0 [mu]g/
m\3\within the Area. This would trigger an evaluation of the conditions
causing the exceedance, whether additional emission control measures
should be implemented to prevent a violation of the standard, and
analysis of potential measures that could be implemented to prevent a
violation. Pennsylvania would then begin its adoption process to
implement the measures as expeditiously as practicable. If a violation
of the PM2.5 NAAQS occurs, PADEP will propose and adopt
necessary additional control measures in accordance with the
implementation schedule in the maintenance plan.
    Pennsylvania's candidate contingency measures include the
following: (1) A regulation based on the Ozone Transport Commission
(OTC) Model Rule to update requirements for consumer products; (2) a
regulation based on the Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) for
industrial cleaning solvents; (3) voluntary diesel projects such as
diesel retrofit for public or private local onroad or offroad fleets,
idling reduction technology for Class 2 yard locomotives, and idling
reduction technologies or strategies for truck stops, warehouses, and
other freight-handling facilities; (4) promotion of accelerated
turnover of lawn and garden equipment, focusing on commercial
equipment; and (5) promotion of alternative fuels for fleets, home
heating and agricultural use. Pennsylvania's rulemaking process and
schedule for adoption and implementation of any necessary contingency
measure is shown in the SIP submittals as being 18 months from PADEP's
approval to initiate rulemaking. For all of the reasons discussed in
this section, EPA is proposing to approve Pennsylvania's 1997 annual
and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 maintenance plan for the Lancaster
Area as meeting the requirements of section 175A of the CAA.

C. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

    Section 176(c) of the CAA requires Federal actions in nonattainment
and maintenance areas to ``conform to'' the goals of SIPs. This means
that such actions will not cause or contribute to violations of a
NAAQS, worsen the severity of an existing violation, or delay timely