[Federal Register: May 15, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 93)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 27265-27276]
[DOCID:fr15my07-13]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0840; FRL-8314-2]

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 June 14, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2006-0840 by one of the following methods:
    A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
    B. E-mail<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 http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information

provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov

or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access''

system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through
http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured

and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some

information is

not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy

during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal are
available at the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection,
Bureau of Air Quality Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market Street,
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Wentworth,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

Table of Contents

I. What Are the Actions EPA Is Proposing to Take?
II. What Is the Background for These Proposed Actions?
III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?
IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?
V. What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?
VI. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Commonwealth's Request?
VII. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and
Identified in the Maintenance Plan for the Lancaster Area Adequate
and Approvable?
VIII. Proposed Actions
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. 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.

B. 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
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Annual 4th
                         Year                            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 redesignation
to attainment. Therefore, the State remains obligated to have NSR, as
well as reasonably available control technology (RACT), and Vehicle
Inspection and Maintenance programs even after redesignation. Second,
the section 184 control measures are region-wide requirements and do
not apply to 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.\1\ 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Number of
                            Year                               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)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Year                         Point *        Area       Nonroad       Mobile       Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
1. Stationary Point Sources
Interstate Pollution Transport Reduction (66 FR 43795, August 21, 2001)
2. Stationary Area Sources
Solvent Cleaning (68 FR 2206, January 16, 2003)
Portable Fuel Containers (69 FR 70893, December 8, 2004)
3. Highway Vehicle Sources
Federal Motor Vehicle Control Programs (FMVCP)
--Tier 1 (56 FR 25724, June 5, 1991)
--Tier 2 (65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000)
Heavy-duty Engine and Vehicle Standards (62 FR 54694, October 21, 1997,
and 65 FR 59896, October 6, 2000)
National Low Emission Vehicle (NLEV) Program (64 FR 72564, December 28,
1999) Vehicle Emission Inspection/Maintenance Program (70 FR 58313,
October 6, 2005)
4. 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.
    (b) 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 25430-25432.
    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)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     2004 VOC     2009 VOC     2018 VOC
         Source category            emissions    emissions    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)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     2004 NOX     2009 NOX     2018 NOX
         Source category            emissions    emissions    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 Sec.  51.112, MVEBs must be established in an ozone maintenance
plan. A MVEB is the portion of the total allowable emissions that is
allocated to highway and transit vehicle use and emissions. A MVEB
serves as a ceiling on emissions from an area's planned transportation
system. The MVEB concept is further explained in the preamble to the
November 24, 1993, transportation conformity rule (58 FR 62188). The
preamble also describes how to establish and revise the MVEBs

in control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans.
    Under section 176(c) of the 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 MVEB 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 Web site concurrently with this proposal. The
public comment period will end at the same time as the public comment
period for this proposed rule. In this case, EPA is concurrently
processing the 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 Web site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/index.htm
 (once there, click

on ``Adequacy Review of SIP Submissions'').

VIII. Proposed Actions

    EPA is proposing to determine that the 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 MVEB identified
in the maintenance plan, does not impose an information collection
burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

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

40 CFR Part 81

    Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.

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

    Dated: May 4, 2007.
James W. Newsom,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
 [FR Doc. E7-9296 Filed 5-14-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P