	ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

	40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

	[EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0840; FRL-      ]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Redesignation of the Lancaster 8-hour Ozone Nonattainment
Area to Attainment and Approval of the Associated Maintenance Plan and
2002 Base-Year Inventory

AGENCY:  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:  Proposed rule.

SUMMARY:  EPA is proposing to approve a redesignation request and State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania.  The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
(PADEP) is requesting that the Lancaster ozone nonattainment area
(“Lancaster Area” or “Area”) be redesignated as attainment for
the 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS).  The
Area is comprised of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania.  EPA is proposing
to approve the ozone redesignation request for the Lancaster Area.  In
conjunction with its redesignation request, the Commonwealth submitted a
SIP revision consisting of a maintenance plan for the Lancaster Area
that provides for continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for 11
years after redesignation.  EPA is proposing to make a determination
that the Lancaster Area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, based upon
three years of complete, quality-assured ambient air quality monitoring
data for 2003-2005.  EPA’s proposed approval of the 8-hour ozone
redesignation request is based on its determination that the Lancaster
Area has met the criteria for redesignation to attainment specified in
the Clean Air Act (CAA).  In addition, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
has also submitted a 2002

base-year inventory for the Lancaster Area, and EPA is proposing to
approve that inventory for the Lancaster Area as a SIP revision.  EPA is
also providing information on the status of its adequacy determination
for the motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) that are identified in

the maintenance plan for the Lancaster Area for purposes of
transportation conformity, and is

also proposing to approve those MVEBs.  EPA is proposing approval of the
redesignation request and of the maintenance plan and 2002 base-year
inventory SIP revisions in accordance with the requirements of the CAA.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before [insert date 30
days from date of publication].

ADDRESSES:  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number
EPA-R03-OAR-

2006-0840 by one of the following methods:

A.  www.regulations.gov.  Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.

      B.  E-mail:    HYPERLINK<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
C.  Mail:  EPA- R03-OAR-2006-0840, Linda Miller, Acting Chief, Air
Quality Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.

      D.  Hand Delivery:  At the previously-listed EPA Region III
address.  Such deliveries are

only accepted during the Docket(s normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements

should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

Instructions:  Direct your comments to Docket ID No.
EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0840.  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 e-mail.  The www.regulations.gov website is an
(anonymous access( system, which means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your
comment.  If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going
through  www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically
captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the
public docket and made available on the Internet.  If you submit an
electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other
contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or
CD-ROM you submit.  If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.  Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.

Docket:  All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
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 19103.  Copies of the State submittal
are available at the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Protection,  Bureau of Air Quality Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market
Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Ellen Wentworth,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
e-

mail at   HYPERLINK<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is
used, we mean EPA.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

What Are the Actions EPA Is Proposing to Take?

What Is the Background for These Proposed Actions?

 What Are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?

 Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?

 What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?

 What Is EPA’s Analysis of the Commonwealth’s Request?

 Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and Identified in
the Maintenance Plan for the Lancaster Area Adequate and Approvable?

Proposed Actions

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

What Are the Actions EPA Is Proposing to Take?

On September 20, 2006, as supplemented on November 8, 2006, the PADEP
formally submitted a request to redesignate the Lancaster Area from
nonattainment to attainment of the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone.
Concurrently, Pennsylvania submitted a maintenance plan for the
Lancaster Area as a SIP revision to ensure continued attainment in the
Area for at least 11 years after redesignation.  PADEP also submitted a
2002 base-year inventory for the Lancaster Area as a SIP revision.  The
Lancaster Area is comprised of the County of Lancaster.  It is currently
designated a marginal 8-hour ozone nonattainment area.  EPA is proposing
to determine that the Lancaster Area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
and that it has met the requirements for redesignation pursuant to
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.  EPA is, therefore, proposing to
approve the redesignation request to change the designation of the
Lancaster Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.  EPA is also proposing to approve the Lancaster maintenance plan
as a SIP revision for the Area (such approval being one of the CAA
criteria for redesignation to attainment status).  The maintenance plan
is designed to ensure continued attainment in the Lancaster Area for the
next 11 years.  EPA is also proposing to approve the 2002 base-year
inventory for the Lancaster Area as a SIP revision.  Additionally, EPA
is announcing its action on the adequacy process for the MVEBs
identified in the Lancaster Area maintenance plan, and proposing to
approve the MVEBs identified for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and
nitrogen oxides (NOx) for the Lancaster Area for transportation
conformity purposes.

II.  What Is the Background for These Proposed Actions?

A.  General

Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources.  Rather,
emissions of NOx and VOC

react in the presence of sunlight to form ground-level ozone.  The air
pollutants NOx and VOC are referred to as precursors of ozone.  The CAA
establishes a process for air quality management through the attainment
and maintenance of the NAAQS.

On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone standard of
0.08 parts per million (ppm).  This new standard is more stringent than
the previous 1-hour standard.  EPA designated, as nonattainment, any
area violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the air quality data for
the three years of 2001-2003.  These were the most recent three years of
data at the time EPA designated 8-hour areas.  The Lancaster Area was
designated a moderate 8-hour ozone nonattainment area in a Federal
Register notice signed on April 15, 2004 and published on

April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857), based on its exceedance of the 8-hour
health-based standard for ozone during the years 2001-2003.  In July
2004, Pennsylvania requested that the EPA reclassify the Lancaster Area
to a “marginal” 8-hour ozone nonattainment Area in accordance with
section 181(a)(4) of the CAA, which allows a state to request
reclassification if the design value in the nonattainment area is five
percent greater or five percent less than the level on which the
classification is based.  The Lancaster Area was reclassified by EPA as
a “marginal” 8-hour ozone nonattainment area on September 22, 2004
(69 FR 56697).

On April 30, 2004, EPA issued a final rule (69 FR 23951, 23996) to
revoke the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the Lancaster Area (as well as most
other areas of the country) effective June 15, 2005.  See, 40 CFR
50.9(b); 69 FR at 23996 (April 30, 2004); 70 FR 44470 (August 3, 2005).

However, on December 22, 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit vacated EPA’s Phase 1 Implementation Rule
for the 8-hour Ozone Standard, (69 FR 23951, April 30, 2004).  See,
South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir.
2006) (hereafter “South  Coast.”).  The Court held that certain
provisions of EPA’s Phase 1 Rule were inconsistent with the
requirements of the Clean Air Act.  The Court rejected EPA’s reasons
for implementing the 8-hour standard in nonattainment areas under
subpart 1 in lieu of subpart 2 of Title I, part D of the Act.  The Court
also held that EPA improperly failed to retain four measures required
for 1-hour nonattainment areas under the anti-backsliding provisions of
the regulations:  (1) nonattainment area New Source Review (NSR)
requirements based on an area’s 1-hour nonattainment classification;
(2) Section 185 penalty fees for 1-hour severe or extreme nonattainment
areas; (3) measures to be implemented pursuant to section 172(c)(9) or
182(c)(9) of the Act, on the contingency of an area not making
reasonable further progress toward attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or
for failure to attain that NAAQS; and (4) the certain conformity
requirements for certain types of federal actions.  The Court upheld
EPA’s authority to revoke the 1-hour standard provided there were
adequate anti-backsliding provisions.  Elsewhere in this document,
mainly in section VI.B, “The Lancaster Area Has Met All Applicable
Requirements Under Section 110 and Part D of the CAA and Has a Fully
Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) of the CAA,” EPA discusses its
rationale why the decision in South Coast is not an impediment to
redesignating the Lancaster Area to attainment of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.

The CAA, title I, part D, contains two sets of provisions—subpart 1
and subpart 2 –that address planning and control requirements for
nonattainment areas.  Subpart 1 (which EPA refers to as “basic”
nonattainment) contains general, less prescriptive requirements for
nonattainment areas for any pollutant—including ozone—governed by a
NAAQS.  Subpart 2 (which EPA refers to

as “classified” nonattainment) provides more specific requirements
for ozone nonattainment areas.  Some 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas
are subject only to the provisions of subpart 1.  Other areas are also
subject to the provisions of subpart 2.  Under EPA’s 8-hour ozone
implementation rule, an area was classified under subpart 2 based on its
8-hour ozone design value (i.e., the 3-year average annual
fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration), if it
had a 1-hour design value at or above 0.121 ppm (the lowest 1-hour
design value in the CAA for subpart 2 requirements).  All other areas
were covered under subpart 1, based upon their 8-hour design values.  In
2004, the Lancaster Area was classified a marginal 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area based on air quality monitoring data from 2001-2003.

Therefore, the Lancaster Area is subject to the requirements of subpart
2 of part D.

Under 40 CFR part 50, the 8-hour ozone standard is attained when the
3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average
ambient air quality ozone concentrations is less than or equal to 0.08
ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when rounding is considered).  See 69 FR

23857, (April 30, 2004) for further information.  Ambient air quality
monitoring data for the 3-year period must meet data completeness
requirements.  The data completeness requirements

are met when the average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring
data is greater than 90 percent, and no single year has less than 75
percent data completeness as determined in Appendix I of 40 CFR part 50.
 The ozone monitoring data indicates that the Lancaster Area has a
design value of 0.083 ppm for the 3-year period of 2003-2005, using
complete, quality-assured data.  Therefore, the ambient ozone data for
the Lancaster Area indicates no violations of the 8-hour ozone standard.

 The Lancaster Area

The Lancaster Area consists of the County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania.
Prior to its designation as an 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, the
Lancaster Area was a marginal 1-hour ozone nonattainment Area, and
therefore, was subject to requirements for marginal nonattainment

areas pursuant to section 182(a) of the CAA.  See, 56 FR 56694 (November
6, 1991).

On September 20, 2006 and supplemented on November 8, 2006, the PADEP
requested that the Lancaster Area be redesignated to attainment for the
8-hour ozone standard.  The redesignation request included three years
of complete, quality-assured data for the period of 2003-2005,
indicating that the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone had been achieved in the
Lancaster Area.  The data satisfies the CAA requirements that the 3-year
average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentration (commonly referred to as the area’s design value), must
be less than or equal to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when rounding is
considered).  Under the CAA, a nonattainment area may be redesignated if
sufficient complete, quality-

assured data is available to determine that the area has attained the
standard and the area meets the other CAA redesignation requirements set
forth in section 107(d)(3)(E).

III.  What Are the 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; and

(5) The State containing such area has met all requirements applicable
to the area under section 110 and part D.

EPA provided guidance on redesignations in the General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990, on April 16,
1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented this guidance on April 28, 1992 (57
FR 18070).  EPA has provided further guidance on processing
redesignation requests in the following documents:

“Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value Calculations,” Memorandum
from Bill Laxton, June, 18, 1990;

“Maintenance Plans for Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon Monoxide
Nonattainment Areas,” Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon
Monoxide Programs Branch, April 30, 1992;

“Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Redesignations,” Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 1992;

“Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,” Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4, 1992;

“State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response to
Clean Air Act (Act) Deadlines,” Memorandum from John Calcagni
Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;

“Technical Support Documents (TSDs) for Redesignation Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide

(CO) Nonattainment Areas,” Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief,
Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17, 1993;

“State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas Submitting
Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) on or after
November 15, 1992,” Memorandum from Michael

H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation,
September 17, 1993;

Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, Acting Director, Air Quality Management
Division, to

    Air Division Directors, Regions 1-10, “Use of Actual Emissions in
Maintenance                          Demonstrations for Ozone and CO
Nonattainment Areas,” dated November 30, 1993;

“Part D New Source Review (part D NSR) Requirements for Areas
Requesting

     Redesignation to Attainment,” Memorandum from Mary D. Nichols,
Assistant Administrator      for Air and Radiation, October 14, 1994;
and

“Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration, and Related
Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard,” Memorandum from John S. Seitz,
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, May 10, 1995.

IV.  Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?

On September 20, 2006, the PADEP requested redesignation of the
Lancaster Area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard.  On
September 20, 2006, as supplemented on November 8, 2006, PADEP submitted
a maintenance plan for the Lancaster Area as a SIP revision to ensure
continued attainment at least 11 years after redesignation.  PADEP also
submitted a 2002 base-year inventory concurrently with its maintenance
plan as a SIP revision, which is an applicable requirement for the
Lancaster Area for purposes of redesignation.  EPA has determined that
the Lancaster Area has attained the 8-hour ozone standard and has met
the requirements for redesignation set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E).

V.  What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?

Approval of the redesignation request would change the official
designation of the Lancaster Area from nonattainment to attainment for
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS found at 40 CFR part 81.  It would also
incorporate into the Pennsylvania SIP a 2002 base-year inventory and a
maintenance plan ensuring continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
in the Lancaster Area for the next 11 years.  The maintenance plan
includes contingency measures to remedy any future violations of the
8-hour NAAQS (should they occur), and identifies the NOx and VOC MVEBs
for transportation conformity purposes for the years 2009 and 2018.
These MVEBs are displayed in the following table:

Table 1:  Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in Tons per Day (tpd)

Year	VOC	NOx

2009 	14.3	22.3

2018	  7.8	  9.0

VI.  What Is EPA’s Analysis of the Commonwealth’s Request?

EPA is proposing to determine that the Lancaster Area has attained the
8-hour ozone standard, and that all other redesignation criteria have
been met.  The following is a description of how the PADEP’s September
20, 2006 and November 8, 2006 submittals satisfy the requirements of
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.

A.  The Lancaster Area Has Attained the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS

EPA is proposing to determine that the Lancaster Area has attained the
8-hour ozone NAAQS.  For ozone, an area may be considered to be
attaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS if there are no violations, as
determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.10 and Appendix I of Part 50,
based on three complete, consecutive calendar years of quality-assured
air quality monitoring data.  To attain this standard, the design value,
which is the 3-year average of the fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour
average ozone concentrations measured at each monitor, within the area,
over each year must not exceed the ozone standard of 0.08 ppm.  Based on
the rounding convention described in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix I, the
standard is attained if the design value is 0.084

ppm or below.  The data must be collected and quality-assured in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and recorded in the Air Quality System
(AQS).  The monitors generally should have

remained at the same location for the duration of the monitoring period
required for demonstrating attainment.

In the Lancaster Area, there is one ozone monitor, located in Lancaster
County that measures air quality with respect to ozone.  As part of its
redesignation request, Pennsylvania referenced

ozone monitoring data for the years 2003-2005 for the Lancaster Area.
This data has been quality assured and is recorded in the AQS.  The
fourth-high 8-hour daily maximum concentrations, along with the
three-year average are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2:  Lancaster Area Fourth Highest 8-hour Average Values

Lancaster County Monitor/AQS ID 42-071-0007

Year	Annual 4th Highest Reading (ppm)

2003	0.083

2004	0.081

2005	0.085

The average for the 3-year period 2003-2005 is 0.083 ppm

The air quality data for 2003-2005 show that the Lancaster Area has
attained the 8-hour standard with a design value of 0.083 ppm.  The data
collected at the Lancaster Area monitor satisfies the CAA requirement
that the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum
8-hour average ozone concentration is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm.
EPA believes this conclusion remains valid after review of the available
2006 data because the design value for 2004-2006 would be 0.083 ppm. The
PADEP’s request for redesignation for the Lancaster Area indicates
that the data is complete and was quality assured in accordance with 40
CFR part 58.  The PADEP uses the AQS as the permanent database to
maintain its data and quality assures the data transfers and content for
accuracy.  In addition, as discussed below with respect to the
maintenance plan, PADEP has committed to continue monitoring in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58.  In summary, EPA has determined that the
data submitted by Pennsylvania and data taken from AQS indicate that the
Lancaster Area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

B.  The Lancaster Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section
110 and Part D of the CAA and Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section
110(k) of the CAA

EPA has determined that the Lancaster Area has met all SIP requirements
applicable for purposes of this redesignation under section 110 of the
CAA (General SIP Requirements) and that it meets all applicable SIP
requirements under part D of Title I of the CAA, in accordance with
section 107(d)(3)(E)(v).  In addition, EPA has determined that the SIP
is fully approved with respect to all requirements applicable for
purposes of redesignation in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii).
In making these proposed determinations, EPA ascertained which
requirements are applicable to the Lancaster Area and determined that
the applicable portions of the SIP meeting these requirements are fully
approved under section 110(k) of the CAA.  We note that SIPs must be
fully approved only with respect to applicable requirements.

The September 4, 1992 Calcagni memorandum (“Procedures for Processing
Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,” Memorandum from John
Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, September 4, 1992)
describes EPA’s interpretation of section 107(d)(3)(E) with respect to
the timing of applicable requirements.  Under this interpretation, to
qualify for redesignation, States requesting redesignation to attainment
must meet only the relevant CAA requirements that came due prior to the
submittal of a complete redesignation request.  See also, Michael
Shapiro memorandum, September 17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66 (March
7, 1995) (redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor).  Requirements of the CAA
that are applicable 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.  Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir.
2004).  See also, 68 FR at 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of
St. Louis).

This section also sets forth EPA’s views on the potential effect of
the Court’s ruling in South Coast on this redesignation action.  For
the reasons set forth below, EPA does not believe that the Court’s
ruling alters any requirements relevant to this redesignation action so
as to preclude redesignation, and does not prevent EPA from finalizing
this redesignation.  EPA believes that the Court’s decision, as it
currently stands or as it may be modified based upon any petition for
rehearing that has been filed, imposes no impediment to moving forward
with the redesignation of this Area to attainment, because in either
circumstance, redesignation is appropriate under the relevant
redesignation provisions of the Act and longstanding policies regarding
redesignation requests.

1.  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:

Submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the State after reasonable
public notice and hearing;

Provisions for establishment and operation of appropriate procedures
needed to monitor ambient air quality;

Implementation of a source permit program; provisions for the
implementation of part C requirements (Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD));

Provisions for the implementation of part D requirements for New Source
Review (NSR) permit programs;

Provisions for air pollution modeling; and

Provisions for public and local agency participation in planning and
emission control rule development.

Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to
prevent sources in a State from significantly contributing to air
quality problems in another State.  To implement this provision, EPA has
required certain states to establish programs to address transport of
air pollutants in accordance with the NOx SIP Call, October 27, 1998 (63
FR 57356), amendments to the NOx SIP Call, May 14, 1999 (64 FR 26298)
and March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11222), and the Clean Air Interstate Rule
(CAIR), May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162).  However, the section 110(a)(2)(D)
requirements for a State are not linked with a particular nonattainment
area’s designation and classification in that State.  EPA believes
that the requirements linked with a particular nonattainment area’s
designation and classifications are the relevant measures to evaluate in
reviewing a redesignation request.  The transport SIP submittal
requirements, where applicable, continue to apply to a state regardless
of the designation of any one particular area in the State.

Thus, we do not believe that these requirements should be construed to
be applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation.  In addition,
EPA believes that the other section 110 elements not connected with
nonattainment plan submissions and not linked with an area’s
attainment status are not applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation.  The Lancaster Area will still be subject to these
requirements after it is redesignated.  The section 110 and part

D requirements, which are linked with a particular area’s designation
and classification, are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a
redesignation request.  This policy is consistent with EPA’s existing
policy on applicability of conformity (i.e., for redesignations) and
oxygenated

fuels requirement.  See Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final
rulemakings (61 FR 53174, October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7, 1997);
Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio final

rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida, final
rulemaking (60 FR 62748, December 7, 1995).  See also, the discussion on
this issue in the Cincinnati redesignation (65 FR at 37890, June 19,
2000), and in the Pittsburgh redesignation (66 FR at 53099, October 19,
2001).  Similarly, with respect to the NOx SIP Call rules, EPA noted in
its Phase 1 Final Rule to Implement the 8-hour Ozone NAAQS, that the NOx
SIP Call rules are not “an” ‘applicable requirement’ for
purposes of section 110(1) because the NOx rules apply regardless of an
area’s attainment or nonattainment status for the 8-hour (or the
1-hour) NAAQS.” 69 FR 23951, 23983 (April 30, 2004).

EPA believes that section 110 elements not linked to the area’s
nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation.
As explained later in this notice, two part D requirements applicable
for purposes of redesignation under the 8-hour standard became due prior
to the submission of the redesignation request.

2.  Part D Requirements Under the 8-Hour Standard

Pursuant to an April 30, 2004, final rule (69 FR 23951), the Lancaster
Area was designated a marginal nonattainment area under subpart 2 for
the 8-hour ozone standard.  Sections 172-176 of the CAA, found in
subpart 1 of part D, set forth the basic nonattainment requirements
applicable to all nonattainment areas.  Section 182 of the CAA, found in
subpart 2 of part D, establishes additional specific requirements
depending on the area’s nonattainment classification.

With respect to the 8-hour standard, we do not believe that any part of
the court’s opinion in South Coast would require that this subpart 2
classification be changed upon remand to EPA.  However, even assuming
for present purposes that the Lancaster Area would become subject to a
different classification under a classification scheme created in a
future role in response to the court’s decision, that would not
prevent EPA from finalizing a redesignation for this area.  For

the reasons set forth below, we believe that any additional requirements
that might apply based

on that different classification would not be applicable for purposes of
evaluating the redesignation request.

This belief is based upon (1) EPA’s longstanding policy of evaluating
redesignation requests in accordance only with the requirements due at
the time the request was submitted; and (2) consideration of the
inequity of applying retroactively any requirements that might be
applied in the future.

First, at the time the redesignation request was submitted, the
Lancaster Area was classified under subpart 2 and was required to meet
the subpart 2 requirements.  Under EPA’s longstanding interpretation
of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act, to qualify for
redesignation, states requesting redesignation to attainment must meet
only the relevant SIP requirements that came due prior to the submittal
of a complete redesignation request.  September 4, 1992 Calcagni
memorandum (“Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas
to Attainment,” Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division). See also, Michael Shapiro Memorandum, September
17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66 (March 7, 1995) (redesignation of
Detroit-Ann Arbor); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004)
(which upheld this interpretation); 68 FR 25418, 25424, 25427 (May 12,
2003) (redesignation of St. Louis).

Moreover, it would be inequitable to retroactively apply any new SIP
requirements that were not applicable at the time the request was
submitted, but which might later become applicable.  The D.C. Circuit
has recognized the inequity in such retroactive rulemaking.  See, Sierra
Club v. Whitman, 285 F.3d 63 (D.C. Cir. 2002), in which the D.C. Circuit
upheld a District Court’s ruling refusing to make retroactive an EPA
determination of nonattainment that was past the statutory due date.
Such a determination would have resulted in the imposition of additional
requirements on the area.  The Court stated:  “Although EPA failed to
make the nonattainment determination within the statutory time frame,
Sierra Club’s proposed solution only makes the  situation worse.
Retroactive relief would likely impose large costs on the States, which
would face fines and suits for not implementing air pollution prevention
plans in 1997, even though they were not on notice at the time.”  Id
at 68.  Similarly, here it would be unfair to penalize the Area by
applying to it for purposes of redesignation any additional requirements
that were not in effect at the time it submitted its redesignation
request, but that might apply in the future.

With respect to the 8-hour standard, two part D subpart 2 requirements
became due for the Lancaster Area under section 182(a) of the CAA prior
to redesignation—a 2002 base-year inventory, and the emissions
statement requirement pursuant to section 182(a)(3)(B).  Pennsylvania
already has in its approved SIP an emissions statement rule for the
1-hour standard that covers all portions of the designated 8-hour
nonattainment area, and that satisfies the emissions statement
requirement for the 8-hour standard.  See, 25 Pa. Code 135.21(a)(1)
codified at 40 CFR 52.2020; 60 FR 2881, January 12, 1995.  EPA is
proposing to approve the 2002 base-year inventory for the Lancaster
Area, which was submitted on September 30, 2006, and supplemented on
November 8, 2006, concurrently with its maintenance plan, into the
Pennsylvania SIP.  A detailed evaluation of Pennsylvania’s 2002
base-year inventory for the Lancaster Area can be found in a Technical
Support Document (TSD) prepared by EPA for this rulemaking.  EPA has
determined that the emission inventory and emissions statement
requirements for the Lancaster Area have been satisfied.

EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the general conformity and
NSR requirements of part D as not requiring approval prior to
redesignation.  With respect to section 176, Conformity Requirements,
section 176(c) of the 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 developed, funded or approved under Title 23
U.S.C. and the Federal Transit Act (“transportation conformity”) as
well as to all other Federally supported or funded projects (“general
conformity”).  State conformity revisions must be consistent with
Federal conformity regulations relating to consultation, enforcement and
enforceability that the CAA required the EPA to promulgate.  EPA
believes it is reasonable to interpret the conformity SIP requirements
as not applying for purposes of evaluating the redesignation request
under section 107(d) since State conformity rules are still required
after redesignation and Federal conformity rules apply where State rules
have not been approved.  See, Wall v. EPA, 265 F. 3d 426, 438-440 (6th
Cir. 2001), upholding this interpretation.  See also, 60 FR 62748
(December 7, 1995).

In the case of the Lancaster Area, which is located in the Ozone
Transport Region (OTR), nonattainment NSR requirements will continue to
be applicable after redesignation.  On October 19, 2001 (66 FR 53094),
EPA approved Pennsylvania’s NSR SIP revision for the Lancaster Area.
This revision imposes the OTR NSR requirements in marginal and
incomplete data ozone nonattainment areas and ozone attainment areas
within the Commonwealth.  The OTR requirements are more stringent than
those required in marginal ozone nonattainment areas because a lower
threshold for what constitutes a major stationary source of VOC
emissions is required and a higher offset ratio is required.
Pennsylvania’s NSR SIP also imposes the NSR requirements on major
sources of NOx emissions as required by section 182(f) of the CAA.

EPA has also interpreted the section 184 OTR requirements, including the
NSR program, as not being applicable for purposes of redesignation.  The
rationale for this is based on two considerations.  First, the
requirement to submit SIP revisions for the section 184 requirements
continues to apply to areas in the OTR after redesigntion to attainment.
 Therefore, the State remains obligated to have NSR, as well as
reasonably available control technology (RACT), and Vehicle Inspection
and Maintenance programs even after redesignation.  Second, the section
184 control measures are region-wide requirements and do not apply to
Lancaster by virtue of the Area’s designation and classification.
See, 61 FR 53174, 53175-53176 (October 10, 1996) and 62 FR 24826,
24830-32 (May 7, 1997).

3.  Part D Requirements Under the 1-Hour Standard

In its December 22, 2006 decision in South Coast, the Court also
addressed EPA’s revocation of the 1-hour ozone standard.  The current
status of the revocation and associated anti-backsliding rules is
dependent on whether the Court’s decision stands as originally issued
or is modified in response to any petition for rehearing or request for
clarification that has been filed.  As described more fully below, EPA
believes that the Area has attained the 1-hour standard and has met all
of the requirements under the 1-hour standard that would apply even if
the 1-hour standard is deemed to be reinstated and, those requirements
are viewed as applying under the statute itself.  Thus, the Court’s
decision, as it currently stands, imposes no impediment to moving
forward with the redesignation of this Area to attainment of the 8-hour
standard.  Further, even if the court’s decision were modified based
upon any petition for rehearing that has been filed, such that the
ultimate decision requires something less than compliance with all
applicable 1-hour requirements, since the area meets all such
requirements as explained below, it would certainly meet any lesser
requirements and thus similarly redesignation could proceed.

The conformity portion of the Court’s ruling does not impact the
redesignation request for the Lancaster Area because there are no
conformity requirements that are relevant to a redesignation request for
any standard, including the requirement to submit a transportation
conformity SIP.  As we have previously noted, under longstanding EPA
policy, EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the conformity SIP
requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating a redesignation
request under section 107(d) because state conformity rules are still
required after redesignation and federal conformity rules  apply where
state rules have not been approved.  40 CFR 51.390.  See, Wall v. EPA,
265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding this interpretation.  See, also,
60 FR 62748

(December 7, 1995) (Tampa, Florida redesignation).

With respect to the requirement for submission of contingency measures
for the 1-hour standard, section 182(a) does not require contingency
measures for marginal areas, and, therefore, that portion of the
Court’s ruling does not impact the redesignation request for the
Lancaster Area.

Prior to its designation as an 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, the
Lancaster Area was designated a marginal nonattainment area for the
1-hour standard.  With respect to the 1-hour standard, the applicable
requirements of subpart 1 and of subpart 2 of part D (section 182) for
the Lancaster Area are discussed in the following paragraphs:

Section 182(a)(2)(A) required SIP revisions to correct or amend RACT for
sources in  marginal areas, such as the Lancaster Area, that were
subject to control technique guidelines (CTGs) issued before November
15, 1990 pursuant to CAA section 108.  On December 22, 1994, EPA fully
approved into the Pennsylvania SIP all corrections required under
section 182(a)(2)(A) of the CAA (59 FR 65971, December 22, 1994).  EPA
believes that this requirement applies only to marginal and higher
classified areas under the 1-hour NAAQS pursuant to the 1990 amendments
to the CAA; therefore, this is a one-time requirement.  After an area
has fulfilled the section 182(a)(2)(A) requirement for the 1-hour NAAQS,
there is no requirement under the 8-hour NAAQS.

Section 182(a)(2)(B) relates to the savings clause for vehicle
inspection and maintenance (I/M).  It requires marginal areas to adopt
vehicle I/M programs.  This provision was not applicable to

the Lancaster Area because this area did not have and was not required
to have an I/M program before November 15, 1990.

Section 182(a)(3)(A) requires a triennial Periodic Emissions Inventory
for the nonattainment area.  The most recent inventory for the Lancaster
Area was compiled for 2002 and submitted to EPA as a SIP revision with
the maintenance plan for the Lancaster Area.

Section 182(a)(2)(C) required Pennsylvania to adopt a NSR Permit Program
or to correct its existing program to meet EPA guidance requirements
issued prior to 1990.  As discussed previously, EPA believes it is
reasonable to interpret the NSR requirements of part D as not requiring
approval prior to redesignation.  However, as noted previously, EPA has
fully approved Pennsylvania’s NSR program for the Lancaster Area.

Section 182(a)(3)(B) requires sources of VOCs and NOx in the
nonattainment area to submit Emissions Statements regarding the quantity
of emissions from the previous year.  As discussed previously,
Pennsylvania already has in its approved SIP a previously approved
emissions statement rule for the 1-hour standard which applies to the
Lancaster Area.

Section 182(a)(1) provides for the submission of a comprehensive,
accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all sources, as
described in section 172(c)(3), in accordance with guidance provided by
the Administrator.  In this proposed rule, EPA is proposing to approve a
2002 base-year emissions inventory for the Lancaster Area as meeting the
requirement of section 182(a)(1). While EPA generally required that the
base-year inventory for the 1-hour standard be for

calendar year 1990, EPA believes that Pennsylvania’s 2002 inventory
fulfills this requirement because it meets EPA’s guidance and because
it is more up to date than 1990.  EPA also

proposes to determine that, if the 1-hour standard is deemed to be
reinstated, the 2002 base-year inventory for the 8-hour standard will
provide an acceptable substitute for the base-year

 inventory for the 1-hour standard.

As noted previously, EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the
general conformity requirements of part D as not requiring approval
prior to redesignation.

EPA has previously determined that the Lancaster Area has attained the
1-hour ozone NAAQS

by the November 15, 1993 attainment date (60 FR 3349, January 17, 1995),
and we further believe that the Lancaster Area is still in attainment
for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS based upon the ozone monitoring data for the
years 2003-2005.  To demonstrate attainment, i.e., compliance with this
standard, the annual average of the number of expected exceedances of
the 1-hour

standard over a three-year period must be less than or equal to 1. Table
3 provides a summary of the number of expected exceedances for each of
the years 2003 through 2005 and three-year annual average.

Table 3:  Lancaster Nonattainment Area Number of Expected Exceedances of
the 1-Hour Ozone Standard; Lancaster County Monitor/AQS ID 42-071-0007

Year	Number of Expected Exceedances

2003	1.0

2004	0.0

2005	0.0

The average number of expected exceedances for the 3-year period 2003
through 2005 is 0.3

In summary, EPA has determined that the data submitted by Pennsylvania
and taken from AQS indicates that the Lancaster Area is maintaining air
quality that conforms to the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.  EPA believes this
conclusion remains valid after review of the available 2006 data because
no exceedances were recorded in the Lancaster Area in 2006.

4.  Transport Region Requirements

All areas in the Ozone Transport Region (OTR), both attainment and
nonattainment, are subject to additional control requirements under
section 184 for the purpose of reducing interstate transport of
emissions that may contribute to downwind ozone nonattainment.  The
section 184 requirements include RACT, enhanced vehicle inspection and
maintenance, and Stage II vapor recovery or a comparable measure.

In the case of the Lancaster Area, which is located in the OTR,
nonattainment NSR will be applicable after redesignation.  On October
19, 2001 (66 FR 53094), EPA fully approved Pennsylvania’s NSR SIP
revision consisting of Pennsylvania’s Chapter 127 part D NSR
regulations that cover the Lancaster Area.  The Chapter 127 part D NSR
regulations in the Pennsylvania SIP explicitly apply the requirements
for NSR of section 184 of the CAA to attainment areas within the OTR.

EPA has also interpreted the section 184 OTR requirements, including the
NSR program, as not being applicable for purposes of redesignation.
See, 61 FR 53174, October 10, 1996 and 62 FR 24826, May 7, 1997
(Reading, Pennsylvania Redesignation).  The rationale for this is based
on two considerations.  First, the requirement to submit SIP revisions
for the section 184 requirements continues to apply to areas in the OTR
after redesignation to attainment.  Therefore, the State remains
obligated to have NSR, as well as RACT, and I/M even after
redesignation.  Second, the section 184 control measures are region-wide
requirements and do not apply to the Area by virtue of the Area’s
designation and classification. See, 61 FR 53174 at  53175-53176
(October 10, 1996) and 62 FR 24826 at  24830-24832 (May 7, 1997).

5.  Lancaster Has a Fully Approved SIP for Purposes of Redesignation

EPA has fully approved the Pennsylvania SIP for the purposes of this
redesignation.  EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a
redesignation request, Calcagni Memo, p.3; Southwestern Pennsylvania
Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F. 3d 984, 989-90 (6th Cir. 1998), Wall
v. EPA, 265 F. 3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), plus any additional measures it
may approve in conjunction with a redesignation action.  See, 68 FR at
25425 (May 12, 2003) and citations therein.

The Lancaster Area was a 1-hour ozone marginal nonattainment area at the
time of its

designation as a marginal 8-hour ozone nonattainment area on September
22, 2004 (69 FR 56697).  As stated previously, two subpart 2 part D
requirements became due for the Lancaster Area prior to redesignation--a
2002 base-year inventory, and the emissions statement requirement.
PADEP has submitted concurrently with its maintenance plan, a 2002
base-year inventory as a SIP revision.  In this action, EPA is proposing
approval of this inventory.  The emissions statement requirement for
Lancaster was fulfilled under the 1-hour standard.  Because there are no
outstanding SIP submission requirements applicable for the purposes of
the redesignation of Lancaster, the applicable implementation plan
satisfies all pertinent SIP requirements.

C.  The Air Quality Improvement in the Lancaster Area is Due to
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions Resulting from
Implementation of the SIP and Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control
Regulations and Other Permanent and Enforceable Reductions

EPA believes that the Commonwealth has demonstrated that the observed
air quality improvement in the Lancaster Area is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the
SIP, Federal measures, and other State-adopted measures.  Emissions
reductions attributable to these rules are shown in Table 4.

Table 4:  Total VOC and NOx Emissions for 2002 and 2004 in tons per day
(tpd)

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)

Year	Point *	Area	Nonroad	Mobile	Total

2002	8.5	24.5	17.4	23.4	73.8

2004	8.1	24.4	17.3	19.8	69.6

Diff. (02-04)	0.4	 0.1	  0.1	3.6	4.2

Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)

Year	Point*	Area	Nonroad	Mobile	Total

2002	3.6	2.6	13.7	36.9	56.8

2004	3.9	2.6	13.2	32.3	52.0

Diff (02-04)	-03	0.0	 0.5	 4.6	 4.8

* The stationary point source emissions shown here do not include banked
emission credits of 3.7 tpd of VOC and 11 tpd of NOX as indicated in
Technical Appendix A-4 to Pennsylvania’s SIP submission.

Between 2002 and 2004, VOC emissions decreased by 5.7 percent from 73.8
tpd to 69.6 tpd; NOx emissions decreased by 8.4 percent from 56.8 tpd to
52.0 tpd.  These reductions, and anticipated future reductions, are due
to the following permanent and enforceable measures.

 Stationary Point Sources

Interstate Pollution Transport Reduction (66 FR 43795, August 21, 2001)

Stationary Area Sources

Solvent Cleaning (68 FR 2206, January 16, 2003)

Portable Fuel Containers (69 FR 70893, December 8, 2004)

3.   Highway Vehicle Sources

Federal Motor Vehicle Control Programs (FMVCP)

		-Tier 1 (56 FR 25724, June 5, 1991)

		-Tier 2 (65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000)

Heavy-duty Engine and Vehicle Standards (62 FR 54694, October 21, 1997,
and 65 FR 59896, October 6, 2000)

National Low Emission Vehicle (NLEV) Program (64 FR 72564, December 28,
1999)

Vehicle Emission Inspection/Maintenance Program (70 FR 58313, October 6,
2005)

    Non-Road Sources

Nonroad Diesel Engine and Fuel (69 FR 38958, June 29, 2004)

EPA believes that permanent and enforceable emissions reductions are the
cause of the long-term improvement in ozone levels and are the cause of
the area achieving attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard.

D.  The Lancaster Area Has a Fully Approvable Maintenance Plan Pursuant
to Section 175A of the CAA

In conjunction with its request to redesignate the Lancaster Area to
attainment status,

Pennsylvania submitted a SIP revision to provide for maintenance of the
8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Lancaster Area for at least 11 years after
redesignation.  Pennsylvania is requesting that EPA approve this SIP
revision as meeting the requirement of section 175A of the CAA.  Once
approved, the maintenance plan for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS will ensure
that the SIP for the Lancaster Area meets the requirements of the CAA
regarding maintenance of the applicable 8-

hour ozone standard.

What Is Required in a Maintenance Plan?

Section 175 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

next 10-year period following the initial 10-year period.  To address
the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must
contain such contingency measures, with a schedule for implementation,
as EPA deems necessary to assure prompt correction of any future 8-hour
ozone violations.  Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a
maintenance plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to
attainment.  The Calcagni memo provides additional guidance on the
content of a maintenance plan.  An ozone maintenance plan should address
the following provisions:

(a)  an attainment emissions inventory;

(b)  a maintenance demonstration;

(c)  a monitoring network;

(d)  verification of continued attainment; and

(e)  a contingency plan.

Analysis of the Lancaster Area Maintenance Plan

(a) Attainment inventory – An attainment inventory includes the
emissions during the time period associated with the monitoring data
showing attainment.  An attainment year of 2004 was used for the
Lancaster Area since it is a reasonable year within the 3-year block of
2003-2005 and accounts for reductions attributable to implementation of
the CAA requirements to date.

The 2002 and 2004 point source data was compiled from actual sources.
Pennsylvania requires owners and operators of larger facilities to
submit annual production figures and emission calculations each year.
Throughput data are multiplied by emission factors from Factor
Information Retrieval (FIRE) Data Systems and EPA’s publication series
AP-42, and are based on Source Classification Codes (SCC).  The 2002
area source data was compiled using county-level activity data, from
census numbers, from county numbers, etc.  The 2004 area source data was
projected from the 2002 inventory using temporal allocations provided by
the Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association (MARAMA).

The on-road mobile source inventories for 2002 and 2004 were compiled
using MOBILE6.2 and PENNDOT estimates for VMT.  The PADEP has provided
detailed data summaries to document the calculations of mobile on-road
VOC and NOx emissions for 2002, as well as for the projection years of
2004, 2009, and 2018 (shown in Tables 4 and 5 below).  The 2002 and 2004
emissions for the majority of non-road emission source categories were
estimated using the EPA NONROAD 2005 model.  The NONROAD model
calculates emissions for diesel, gasoline, liquefied petroleum gasoline,
and compressed natural gas-fueled non-road equipment types and includes
growth factors.  The NONROAD model does not estimate emissions from
locomotives or aircraft.  For 2002 and 2004 locomotive emissions, the
PADEP projected emissions from a 1999 survey using national fuel
consumption information and EPA emission and conversion factors.  There
are no commercial aircraft operations in Lancaster County.  For 2002 and
2004 aircraft emissions, PADEP estimated emissions using small airport
operations statistics and emission factors and operational
characteristics in the EPA-approved model, Emissions and Dispersion
Modeling System (EDMS).

More detailed information on the compilation of the 2002, 2004, 2009,
and 2018 inventories can be found in the Technical Appendices which are
part of this submittal.

Maintenance Demonstration – On September 20, 2006, and supplemented on
November 8, 2006, the PADEP submitted a maintenance plan as a SIP
revision as required by section 175A of the CAA.  The Lancaster Area
plan shows maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS by demonstrating that
current and future emissions of VOC and NOx remain at or below the
attainment year 2004 emissions levels throughout the Lancaster Area
through the year 2018.  A maintenance demonstration need not be based on
modeling.  See, Wall v. EPA, supra; Sierra Club v. EPA, supra.  See
also, 66 FR at 53099-53100; 68 FR at 25430-32.

Tables 5 and 6 specify the VOC and NOx emissions for the Lancaster Area
for 2004, 2009, and 2018.  The PADEP chose 2009 as an interim year in
the maintenance demonstration period to demonstrate that the VOC and NOx
emissions are not projected to increase above the 2004 attainment level
during the time of the maintenance period.

Table 5:  Total VOC Emissions for 2004-2018 (tpd)

Source Category	2004 VOC

Emissions	2009 VOC

Emissions	2018 VOC Emissions

Point*	8.1	8.7	11.0

Area	24.4	24.2	27.2

Mobile	19.8	14.3	7.8

Nonroad	17.3	15.0	11.9

Total	69.6	62.2	57.9

*The stationary point source emissions shown here do not include
available banked emission credits as indicated in Appendix A-4 submitted
with the maintenance plan.

Table 6:  Total NOx Emissions for 2004-2018 (tpd)

Source

Category	2004 NOx

Emissions	2009 NOx

Emissions	2018 NOx

Emissions

Point*	3.9	4.1	4.6

Area	2.6	2.8	2.9

Mobile	32.3	22.3	9.0

Non-road	13.2	10.8	6.8

Total	52.0	39.9	23.2

*The stationary point source emissions shown here do not include
available banked emission credits as indicated in Appendix A-4.

The following programs are permanent and enforceable control measures to
ensure emissions during the maintenance period are equal to or less than
the emissions in the attainment year:

The Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) (71 FR 25328, April 28, 2006)

The Federal NOx SIP Call (66 FR 43795, August 21, 2001)

Pennsylvania’s Portable Fuel Containers (December 8, 2004, 69 FR
70893)

Pennsylvania’s Consumer Products (December 8, 2004, 69 FR 70895)

Pennsylvania’s Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings
(November 23, 2004, 69 FR 68080)

Additionally, the following mobile programs are either effective or due
to become effective and will further contribute to the maintenance
demonstration of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS:

FMVCP for passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks and cleaner gasoline
(2009 and 2018 fleet)-- Tier 1 (56 FR 25724, June 5, 1991) and Tier 2
(65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000)

Federal NLEV (64 FR 72564, December 28, 1999)

PA Clean Vehicle Program (December 9, 2006)—Pennsylvania will
implement this program in car model year 2008.

Heavy-duty diesel on-road (2004/2007) and low-sulfur on-road (2006) (66
FR 5002, January 18, 2001)

Non-road emissions standards (2008) and off-road diesel fuel (2007/2010)
(69 FR 38958, June 29, 2004)

Vehicle emission/inspection/maintenance program (70 FR 58313, October 6,
2005)

Pennsylvania Heavy-Duty Diesel Emissions Control Program. (May 11, 2002)

Based upon the comparison of the projected emissions and the attainment
year emissions along with the additional measures, EPA concludes that
PADEP has successfully demonstrated that the 8-hour ozone standard
should be maintained in the Lancaster Areas.

(c)  Monitoring Network – There is currently one monitor measuring
ozone in the Lancaster Area.  PADEP will continue to operate its current
air quality monitor (located in Lancaster County), in accordance with 40
CFR part 58.

(d)  Verification of Continued Attainment – The Commonwealth will
track the attainment status of the ozone NAAQs in the Lancaster Area by
reviewing air quality and emissions during the maintenance period.  The
Commonwealth will perform an annual evaluation of Vehicle Miles Traveled
(VMT) data and emissions reported from stationary sources, and compare
them to the assumptions about these factors used in the maintenance
plan.  The Commonwealth will also evaluate the periodic (every three
years) emission inventories prepared under EPA’s

Consolidated Emission Reporting Regulation (40 CFR 51, subpart A) to see
if the Area exceeds the attainment year inventory (2004) by more than 10
percent.  Based on these evaluations, the Commonwealth will consider
whether any further emission control measures should be implemented.

(e) The Maintenance Plan’s Contingency Measures – The contingency
plan provisions are designed to promptly correct a violation of the
NAAQS that occurs after redesignation.  Section 175A of the CAA requires
that a maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems
necessary to ensure that the State will promptly correct a violation of
the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation.  The maintenance plan should
identify the events that would “trigger” the adoption and
implementation of a contingency measure(s), the contingency measure(s)
that would be adopted and implemented, and the schedule indicating the
time frame by which the state would adopt and implement the measure(s).

The ability of the Lancaster Area to stay in compliance with the 8-hour
ozone standard after redesignation depends upon VOC and NOx emissions in
the Area remaining at or below 2004 levels.  The Commonwealth’s
maintenance plan projects VOC and NOx emissions to decrease and stay
below 2004 levels through the year 2018.  The Commonwealth’s
maintenance plan outlines the procedures for the adoption and
implementation of contingency measures to further reduce emissions
should a violation occur.

Contingency measures will be considered if for two consecutive years the
fourth highest 8-hour ozone concentrations at the Lancaster monitor are
above 84 ppb.  If this trigger point occurs, the Commonwealth will
evaluate whether additional local emission control measures should be
implemented in order to prevent a violation of the air quality standard.
 PADEP will also analyze the conditions leading to the excessive ozone
levels and evaluate which measures might be most effective in correcting
the excessive ozone levels.  PADEP will also analyze the potential
emissions effect of Federal, state, and local measures that have been
adopted but not yet implemented at the time the excessive ozone levels
occurred.  PADEP will then begin the process of implementing any
selected measures.

Contingency measures will be considered in the event that a violation of
the 8-hour ozone standard occurs at the Lancaster County, Pennsylvania
monitor.  In the event of a violation of the 8-hour ozone standard,
contingency measures will be adopted in order to return the Area to
attainment with the standard.  Contingency measures to be considered for
the Lancaster Area will include, but not be limited to the following:

Regulatory measures:

- Additional controls on consumer products.

- Additional controls on portable fuel containers

Non-Regulatory measures:

- Voluntary diesel engine “chip reflash”—installation software to
correct the defeat      device option on certain heavy-duty diesel
engines.

- Diesel retrofit, including replacement, repowering or alternative fuel
use, for public         or private local on-road or off-road fleets.

      - Idling reduction technology for Class 2 yard locomotives.

      -  Idling reduction technologies or strategies for truck stops,
warehouses and other                 freight- handling facilities.

-  Accelerated turnover of lawn and garden equipment, especially
commercial          equipment, including promotion of electric
equipment.

	      - Additional promotion of alternative fuel (e.g., biodiesel) for
home heating and agricultural use.

The plan lays out a process to have any regulatory contingency measures
in effect within 19 months of the trigger.  The plan also lays out a
process to implement the non-regulatory contingency measures within
12-24 months of the trigger.

VII.  Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and Identified
in the Lancaster Maintenance Plan Adequate and Approvable?

A.  What are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets?

Under the CAA, States are required to submit, at various times, control
strategy SIPs and maintenance plans in ozone areas.  These control
strategy SIPs (i.e., RFP SIPs and attainment demonstration SIPs) and
maintenance plans identify and establish MVEBs for certain criteria
pollutants and/or their precursors to address pollution from on-road
mobile sources.  In the maintenance plan, the MVEBs are termed
“on-road mobile source emission budgets.”  Pursuant to 40 CFR part
93 and 51.112, MVEBs must be established in an ozone maintenance plan.
A MVEB is the portion of the total allowable emissions that is allocated
to highway and transit vehicle use and emissions.  A MVEB serves as a
ceiling on emissions from an area’s planned transportation system.
The MVEB concept is further explained in the preamble to the November
24, 1993, transportation conformity rule (58 FR 62188).  The preamble
also describes how to establish and revise the MVEBs in control strategy
SIPs and maintenance plans.

Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation projects, such as
the construction of new highways, must “conform” to (i.e., be
consistent with) the part of the State’s air quality plan that
addresses pollution from cars and trucks.  “Conformity” to the SIP
means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality
violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of or
reasonable progress towards the NAAQS.  If a transportation plan does
not “conform,” most new projects that would expand the capacity of
roadways cannot go forward.  Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth EPA
policy, criteria, and procedures for demonstrating and ensuring
conformity of such transportation activities to a SIP.

When reviewing submitted “control strategy” SIPs or maintenance
plans containing MVEBs, EPA must affirmatively find the MVEB contained
therein “adequate” for use in determining transportation conformity.
 After EPA affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB is adequate for
transportation conformity purposes, that MVEB can be used by state and
federal agencies in determining whether proposed transportation projects
“conform” to the SIP as required by section 176(c) of the CAA.
EPA’s substantive criteria for determining “adequacy” of a MVEB
are set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4).

EPA’s process for determining “adequacy” consists of three basic
steps:  public notification of a SIP submission, a public comment
period, and EPA’s adequacy finding.  This process for determining the
adequacy of submitted SIP MVEBs was initially outlined in EPA’s May
14,

1999 guidance, “Conformity Guidance on Implementation of March 2,
1999, Conformity Court Decision.”  This guidance was finalized in the
Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for the “New 8-Hour Ozone
and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Miscellaneous
Revisions for Existing Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments
– Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Change” on July 1,
2004 (69 FR 40004).  EPA consults this guidance and follows this
rulemaking in making its adequacy determinations.

The MVEBS for the Lancaster Area are listed in Table 1 of this document
for the 2009 and 2018 years, and are the projected emissions for the
on-road mobile sources plus any portion of the safety margin allocated
to the MVEBs.  These emission budgets, when approved by EPA, must

be used for transportation conformity determinations.

B.  What is a Safety Margin?

A safety margin is the difference between the attainment level of
emissions (from all sources)

and the projected level of emissions (from all sources) in the
maintenance plan.  The attainment level of emissions is the level of
emissions during one of the years in which the area met the NAAQS.  The
safety margin is the extra emissions that can be allocated as long as
the total attainment level of emissions is maintained.  The credit, or a
portion thereof, can be allocated to any of the source categories.
PADEP is at this time preserving the entire difference between
attainment and projected maintenance year emissions to ensure continued
maintenance of the standard.

C.  Why Are the MVEBs Approvable?

The 2009 and 2018 MVEBs for the Lancaster Area are approvable because
the MVEBs for NOx and VOCs continue to maintain the total emissions at
or below the attainment year inventory levels as required by the
transportation conformity regulations.

D.  What Is the Adequacy and Approval Process for the MVEBs in the
Lancaster Maintenance Plan?

The MVEBs for the Lancaster Area maintenance plan are being posted to
EPA’s conformity Website concurrently with this proposal.  The public
comment period will end at the same time as the public comment period
for this proposed rule.  In this case, EPA is concurrently processing
the action on the maintenance plan and the adequacy process for the
MVEBs contained therein.  In this proposed rule, EPA is proposing to
find the MVEBs adequate and also proposing to approve the MVEBs as part
of the maintenance plan.  The MVEBs cannot be used for transportation
conformity until the maintenance plan and associated MVEBs are approved
in a final Federal  Register  notice, or EPA otherwise finds the budgets
adequate in a separate action following the comment period.

If EPA receives adverse written comments with respect to the proposed
approval of the Lancaster MVEBs, or any other aspect of our proposed
approval of this updated maintenance plan, we will respond to the
comments on the MVEBs in our final action or proceed with the adequacy
process as a separate action.  Our action on the Lancaster Area MVEBs
will also be announced on EPA’s conformity Website:    HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/index.htm"
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/index.htm  (once there,
click on “Adequacy Review of SIP Submissions”).

Proposed Actions

EPA is proposing to determine that the Lancaster Area has attained the
8-hour ozone NAAQS.  EPA is also proposing to approve the redesignation
of the Lancaster Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.  EPA has evaluated Pennsylvania’s redesignation request
and determined that it meets the redesignation criteria set forth in
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.  EPA believes that the redesignation
request and monitoring data demonstrate that the Lancaster Area has
attained the 8-hour ozone standard.  The final approval of this
redesignation request would change the designation of the Lancaster Area
from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard.  EPA is
also proposing to approve the associated maintenance plan for the
Lancaster Area, submitted on September 20, 2006, and supplemented on
November 8, 2006, as a revision to the Pennsylvania SIP.  EPA is
proposing to approve the maintenance plan for the Lancaster Area because
it meets the requirements of section 175A as described previously in
this notice.  EPA is also proposing to approve the 2002 base-year
inventory for the Lancaster Area, and the MVEBs submitted by
Pennsylvania for the Lancaster Area in conjunction with its
redesignation request.  EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues
discussed in this

document.  These comments will be considered before taking final action.

IX.  Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
proposed action is not a "significant regulatory action" and therefore
is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.  For
this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
"Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use"  (66 Fed. Reg. 28355 (May 22, 2001)).  This action
merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and
imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this proposed rule will
not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).   Because this rule
proposes to approve pre-existing requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state
law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4).  This proposed rule also does not
have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999),
because it merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a
Federal requirement, and does not alter the relationship or the
distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air
Act. This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62
FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it approves a state rule implementing
a Federal standard.  In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA(s role is to
approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean
Air Act.  In this context, in the absence of a prior existing
requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS),
EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use
VCS.  It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it
reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that
otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act.  Redesignation
is an action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not
impose any new requirements on sources.  Thus, the requirements of
section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of
1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.  As required by section 3 of
Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing this
proposed rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting
errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear
legal standard for affected conduct.  EPA has complied with Executive
Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the takings
implications of the rule in accordance with the (Attorney General(s
Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of
Unanticipated Takings( issued under the executive order.

This rule, proposing to approve the redesignation of the Lancaster Area
to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the associated maintenance
plan, the 2002 base-year inventory, and the MVEBS identified in the
maintenance plan, does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness Areas.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

___________________________     		      ___________/s/_________________

Dated:   May 4, 2007                                           	James W.
Newsom, Acting

Regional Administrator,

                                                                 	Region
III.

 The Clean Air Act section 176(c )(4)(E) currently requires States to
submit revisions to their SIPs to reflect certain federal criteria and
procedures for determining transportation conformity.  Transportation
conformity SIPs are different from the motor vehicle emissions budgets
that are established in control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans.

 PAGE  47