  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0175; FRL-     ]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Redesignation of the Reading Ozone Nonattainment Area to
Attainment and Approval of the Area’s Maintenance Plan and 2002 Base
Year Inventory

AGENCY:  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:  Proposed rule.

SUMMARY:  EPA is proposing to approve a redesignation request and a
State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the Commonwealth
of Pennsylvania.  The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Protection (PADEP) is requesting that the Reading, Berks County,
Pennsylvania ozone nonattainment area (Reading Area) be redesignated as
attainment for the 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard
(NAAQS).  EPA is proposing to approve the ozone redesignation request
for Reading Area.  In conjunction with its redesignation request, PADEP
submitted a SIP revision consisting of a maintenance plan for Reading
Area that provides for continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
for at least 10 years after redesignation and that amends the existing
1-hour ozone maintenance plan for the Reading Area.  EPA is proposing to
make a determination that the Reading Area has attained the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, based upon three years of complete, quality-assured ambient air
quality ozone monitoring data for 2003-2005.  EPA’s proposed approval
of the 8-hour ozone redesignation request is based on its determination
that the Reading Area has met the criteria for redesignation to
attainment specified in the Clean Air Act (CAA).  In addition, PADEP
submitted a 2002 base year inventory for the Reading Area which EPA is
proposing to approve as a SIP revision.  EPA is also providing
information on the status of its adequacy determination for the motor
vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) that are identified in the Reading Area
maintenance plan for purposes of transportation conformity, which EPA is
also proposing to approve.  EPA is proposing approval of the
redesignation request, and the maintenance plan and the 2002 base year
inventory SIP revisions in accordance with the requirements of the 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-2007-0175 by one of the following methods:

A.  	    HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"  www.regulations.gov .
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.

B.	E-mail:   HYPERLINK<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>.

C.  	Mail:  EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0175, Linda Miller, Acting Chief, Air
Quality Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.

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

only accepted during the Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

Instructions:  Direct your comments to Docket ID No.
EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0175.  EPA's policy is that all comments received will
be included in the public docket without change, and may be made
available online at     HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"
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     HYPERLINK
"http://www.regulations.gov"  www.regulations.gov  or e-mail.  The
HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"  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     HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"
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
HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"  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     HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"
www.regulations.gov  or in hard copy during normal business hours at the
Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.  Copies of the
State submittal are available at the Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Protection, Bureau of Air Quality, P.O. Box 8468,
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Christopher Cripps,<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

I.   	What Actions are EPA Proposing to Take?

II.   	What is the Background for These Proposed Actions?

III.  	What are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?

IV.  	Why is EPA Taking These Actions?

V.  	What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?

VI.  	What is EPA’s Analysis of the State’s Request and SIP
Revision?

VII.  	Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and
Identified in the Maintenance

	Plan for the Reading Area Adequate and Approvable?

VIII.  	Proposed Actions

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I.  What Actions are EPA Proposing to Take?

On January 25, 2007, PADEP formally submitted a request to redesignate
the Reading Area from nonattainment to attainment of the 8-hour NAAQS
for ozone.  Concurrently, on January 25, 2007, PADEP submitted a
maintenance plan for the Reading Area as a SIP revision to ensure
continued attainment of the 8-hour NAAQS for at least 10 years after
redesignation and continued attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS until
2018.  PADEP submitted a supplement to the technical support for the
maintenance plan on April 12, 2007.  (Hereafter, when we say the
maintenance plan was submitted on January 25, 2007 we mean that it
submitted on January 25, 2007, with a supplement submitted on April 12,
2007.)  PADEP also submitted a 2002 base year inventory as a SIP
revision on January 25, 2007.  The Reading Area is currently designated
as a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment area and is covered by a
maintenance plan for the 1-hour NAAQS.  EPA is proposing to determine
that the Reading 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 Reading Area from
nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.  EPA is also
proposing to approve the Reading Area maintenance plan as a SIP
revision, such approval being one of the CAA criteria for redesignation
to attainment status.  The maintenance plan is designed to ensure
continued attainment in the Reading Area for the next ten years.  EPA is
also proposing to approve the 2002 base year inventory for the Reading
Area as a SIP revision.  Additionally, EPA is announcing its action on
the adequacy process for the MVEBs identified in the Reading Area
maintenance plan, and proposing to approve the MVEBs identified for
volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) for
transportation conformity purposes.

II.  What is the Background for These Proposed Actions?

A.  General

Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources.  Rather,
emissions of NOx and VOC react in the presence of sunlight to form
ground-level ozone.  The air pollutants NOx and VOC are referred to as
precursors of ozone.  The 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 ozone standard.  EPA designated, as nonattainment,
any area violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the air quality data
for the three years of 2001-2003.  These were the most recent three
years of data at the time EPA designated 8-hour areas.  The Reading Area
was designated as basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment status in a Federal
Register notice signed on April 15, 2004 and published on April 30, 2004
(69 FR 23857), based on its exceedance of the 8-hour health-based
standard for ozone during the years 2001-2003.  On April 30, 2004, EPA
issued a final rule (69 FR 23951, 23996) to revoke the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS in the Reading 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); and see 70 FR 44470 (August 3, 2005).

However, on December 22, 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit vacated EPA's Phase 1 Implementation Rule
for the 8-hour Ozone Standard. (69 FR 23951, April 30, 2004).  South
Coast Air Quality Management Dist.  v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C.Cir.
2006) (hereafter “South Coast.”). 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 Reading 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 Reading 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, signed on April 15, 2004, 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
are covered under subpart 1, based upon their 8-hour design values.  In
2004, Reading Area was designated a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment
area based upon air quality monitoring data from 2001-2003, and
therefore, is subject to the requirements of subpart 1 of Part D.

Under 40 CFR part 50, the 8-hour ozone standard is attained when the
3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average
ambient air quality ozone concentrations is less than or equal to 0.08
ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when rounding is considered).  See 69 FR 23857,
(April 30, 2004) for further information.  Ambient air quality
monitoring data for the 3-year period must meet data completeness
requirements.  The data completeness requirements are met when the
average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring data is greater
than 90 percent, and no single year has less than 75 percent data
completeness as determined in Appendix I of 40 CFR part 50.  The ozone
monitoring data from the 3-year period of 2003-2005 indicates that the
Reading Area has a design value of 0.080 ppm.  Therefore, the ambient
ozone data for the Reading Area indicates no violations of the 8-hour
ozone standard.

B.  The Reading Area

The Reading Area consists solely of Berks County, Pennsylvania and was
designated as basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment status in an April 30,
2004 Final Rule (69 FR 23857).  Prior to its designation as an 8-hour
basic ozone nonattainment area, the Reading Area was designated an
incomplete data nonattainment area for the 1-hour standard.  See 56 FR
56694 at 56822, November 6, 1991.  Prior to its designation as an 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area, the Reading Area had been designated and
classified as a moderate ozone nonattainment area for the 1-hour
standard.   See 56 FR 56694 at 56822, November 6, 1991.  On May 7, 1997
(62 FR 24826), EPA approved a request to redesignate the Reading area to
attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard and approved a maintenance plan
SIP revision.

On January 25, 2007, PADEP requested that the Reading Area be
redesignated to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard.  The
redesignation request included 3 years of complete, quality-assured data
for the period of 2003-2005, indicating that the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone
had been achieved in the Reading Area.  The data satisfies the CAA
requirements when the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration (commonly referred to as the
area’s design value) is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084
ppm when rounding is considered).  Under the 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 redesignation 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 (TSD’s) for Redesignation Ozone and
Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,” Memorandum from G.T. Helms,
Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17, 1993;

“State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas Submitting
Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) On or After
November 15, 1992,” Memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting
Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, September 17, 1993

Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, Acting Director, Air Quality Management
Division, to Air Division Directors, Regions 1-10, “Use of Actual
Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for Ozone and CO Nonattainment
Areas,” dated November 30, 1993;

“Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,” Memorandum from Mary D.
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14,
1994; and

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

IV.  Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?

On January 25, 2007, PADEP requested redesignation of the Reading Area
to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard.  On January 25, 2007, PADEP
submitted a maintenance plan for the Reading Area as a SIP revision to
assure continued attainment at least 10 years after redesignation.
EPA has determined that the Reading Area has attained the 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 designation of
the Reading 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 Reading
Area for the next 10 years.  The maintenance plan includes contingency
measures to remedy any future violations of the 8-hour NAAQS (should
they occur), and identifies the MVEBs for NOx and VOC for transportation
conformity purposes for the years 2004, 2009 and 2018.  These motor
vehicle emissions (2004) and MVEBs (2009 and 2018) are displayed in the
following table:

Table 1: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in tons per day (rounded to one
decimal place)

Year	VOC	NOx

2009	13.1	21.3

2018	7.5	9.0

VI.  What is EPA’s Analysis of the State’s Request and SIP Revision?

EPA is proposing to determine that Reading Area has attained the 8-hour
ozone standard and that all other redesignation criteria have been met.
The following is a description of how PADEP’s January 25, 2007,
submittal satisfies the requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.

A.  The Reading Area Has Attained the Ozone NAAQS

In the Reading Area, there is one monitor that measures air quality with
respect to ozone.  As part of its redesignation request, Pennsylvania
submitted ozone monitoring data for the years 2003-2005 (the most recent
three years of data available as of the time of the redesignation
request) for the Reading Area.  This data has been quality assured and
is recorded in AQS.

Based upon this data, EPA is proposing to determine that the Reading
Area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.  For the 8-hour ozone
standard, an area may be considered to be attaining the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS if there are no violations, as determined in accordance with 40
CFR 50.10 and Appendix I of part 50, based on three complete and
consecutive calendar years of quality-assured air quality monitoring
data.  To attain this standard, the design value, which is the  3-year
average of the fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentrations,  measured at each monitor within the area over each year
must not exceed the ozone standard of 0.08 ppm.  Based on the rounding
convention described in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix I, the standard is
attained if the design value is 0.084 ppm or below.  The data must be
collected and quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and
recorded in EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS).  PADEP uses the AQS as the
permanent database to maintain its data and quality assures the data
transfers and content for accuracy.  The monitors generally should have
remained at the same location for the duration of the monitoring period
required for demonstrating attainment.  The fourth-high 8-hour daily
maximum concentrations, along with the three-year average, are
summarized in Table 2A.

Table 2A: Reading Nonattainment Area Fourth Highest 8-hour Ozone Values;
  UGI Co Mongantown Rd And Prospect St Reading Berks Co, AQS ID
42-011-0009

Year	Annual 4th High Reading (ppm)

2003	0.080

2004	0.076

2005	0.085

The average for the 3-year period 2003 through 2005 is 0.080 ppm

The air quality data for 2003-2005 show that the Reading Area has
attained the standard with a design value of 0.080 ppm.  The data
collected at the Reading 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.
PADEP’s request for redesignation for the Reading Area indicates that
the data was quality assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.  In
addition, as discussed below with respect to the maintenance plan, PADEP
has committed to continue monitoring in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.
 EPA believes this conclusion remains valid that after review of the
quality assured 2006 data because the design value for 2004-2006 would
be 0.079 ppm.  In summary, EPA has determined that the data submitted by
Pennsylvania and taken from AQS indicates that Reading Area has attained
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

Based upon the ozone monitoring data for the years 2003-2005, EPA
believes that the Reading Area is still in attainment for the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS.  For the 1-hour ozone standard, an area may be considered
to be attaining the 1-hour ozone NAAQS if there are no violations, as
determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.9 and Appendix H of part 50,
based on three complete and consecutive calendar years of
quality-assured air quality monitoring data.  Compliance is determined
on a monitor-by-monitor basis within the area.  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 3-year
period must be less than or equal to 1.  (To account for missing data,
adjustment of the actual number of monitored exceedances of the standard
yields the annual expected number of exceedances at an air quality
monitoring site.)  Table 2B provides a summary of the number of expected
exceedances for each of the years 2003 through 2005 and three-year
annual average.

Table 2B: Reading Nonattainment Area Number of Expected Exceedances of
the 1-Hour Ozone Standard;   UGI Co Mongantown Rd And Prospect St
Reading Berks Co, AQS ID 42-011-0009

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 Reading Area is maintaining air
quality that conforms to the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.  EPA believes this
conclusion remains valid after review of the quality assured 2006 data
because no exceedances were recorded in the Reading Area in 2006.

B.  The Reading 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 Reading 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 what
requirements are applicable to the area, and determined that the
applicable portions of the SIP meeting these requirements are fully
approved under section 110(k) of the 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 come due prior to the
submittal of a complete redesignation request.  See also Michael Shapiro
memorandum, September 17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66, (March 7,
1995) (redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor).  Applicable requirements of
the CAA that come due subsequent to the area’s submittal of a complete
redesignation request remain applicable until a redesignation is
approved, but are not required as a prerequisite to redesignation.
Section 175A(c) of the CAA.  Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir.
2004).  See also 68 FR 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of St.
Louis).

This 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
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 requirement (Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD));

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

Provisions for air pollution modeling; and

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

Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to
prevent sources in a State from significantly contributing to air
quality problems in another State.  To implement this provision, EPA has
required certain States to establish programs to address transport of
air pollutants in accordance with the NOx SIP Call, October 27, 1998 (63
FR 57356), amendments to the NOx SIP Call, May 14, 1999 (64 FR 26298)
and March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11222), and the Clean Air Interstate Rule
(CAIR), May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162).  However, the section 110(a)(2)(D)
requirements for a State are not linked with a particular nonattainment
area’s designation and classification in that State.  EPA believes
that the requirements linked with a particular nonattainment area’s
designation and classifications are the relevant measures to evaluate in
reviewing a redesignation request.  The transport SIP submittal
requirements, where applicable, continue to apply to a State regardless
of the designation of any one particular area in the State.  Thus, we do
not believe that these requirements 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 Reading
Area will still be subject to these requirements after it is
redesignated.  The section 110 and Part D requirements, which are linked
with a particular area’s designation and classification, are the
relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request.
This policy is consistent with EPA’s existing policy on applicability
of conformity (i.e., for redesignations) and oxygenated fuels
requirement.  See Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final rulemakings,
(61 FR 53174-53176, October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24816, May 7, 1997);
Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio, final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7,
1996); and Tampa, Florida, final rulemaking (60 FR 62748, December 7,
1995).  See also the discussion on this issue in the Cincinnati
redesignation (65 FR at 37890, June 19, 2000), and in the Pittsburgh
redesignation (66 FR at 50399, October 19, 2001).  Similarly, with
respect to the NOx SIP Call rules, EPA noted in its Phase 1 Final Rule
to Implement the 8-hour Ozone NAAQS, that the NOx SIP Call rules are not
“an ‘applicable requirement’ for purposes of section 110(l)
because the NOx rules apply regardless of an area’s attainment or
nonattainment status for the 8-hour (or the 1-hour) NAAQS.” 69 FR
23951, 23983 (April 30, 2004).

EPA believes that section 110 elements not linked to the area’s
nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation.
Any section 110 requirements that are linked to the Part D requirements
for 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are not yet due, because, as we
explain later in this notice, no Part D requirements applicable for
purposes of redesignation under the 8-hour standard became due prior to
submission of the redesignation request.

Because the Pennsylvania SIP satisfies all of the applicable general SIP
elements and requirements set forth in section 110(a)(2),  EPA concludes
that Pennsylvania has satisfied the criterion of section 107(d)(3)(E)
regarding section 110 of the Act.

2.  Part D Nonattainment Area Requirements Under the 8-Hour Standard

Sections 172-176 of the CAA, found in subpart 1 of Part D, set forth the
basic nonattainment requirements for 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.

Under an April 30, 2004, final rule (69 FR 23951), EPA classified the
Reading Area as a subpart 1 nonattainment area under the 8-hour ozone
standard.   EPA believes that no subpart 1 requirements need to be
approved prior to redesignation.  Of the nonattainment plan provisions
due under section 172, none were due prior to redesignation because
EPA’s November 29, 2005 final rule (70 FR 71612) set the deadline for
these requirements at 3 years after resignation which for the Reading
Area is June 15, 2007.

With respect to the 8- hour standard, the Court's ruling in South Coast
rejected EPA's reasons for classifying areas under Subpart 1 for the
8-hour standard, and remanded that matter to the Agency.
Consequently, it is possible that this area could, during a remand to
EPA, be reclassified under Subpart 2.  Although any future decision by
EPA to classify this area under subpart 2 might trigger additional
future requirements for the area, EPA believes that this does not mean
that redesignation cannot now go forward.  This belief is based upon
(1) EPA's longstanding policy of evaluating requirements in accordance
with the requirements due at the time the request is submitted; and (2)
consideration of the inequity of applying retroactively any requirements
that might in the future be applied.

First, at the time the redesignation request was submitted, the Reading
Area was classified under Subpart 1 and was obligated to meet Subpart 1
requirements.  Under EPA's longstanding interpretation of section
107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act, to qualify for redesignation, states
requesting redesignation to attainment must meet only the relevant SIP
requirements that came due prior to the submittal of a complete
redesignation request.  See September 4, 1992 Calcagni memorandum
(“Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,” Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division).  See also, Michael Shapiro Memorandum, September
17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66 (March 7, 1995)(Redesignation of
Detroit-Ann Arbor); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004),
which upheld this interpretation; 68 FR 25418, at 25424, 25427 (May 12,
2003) (redesignation of St. Louis).

Moreover, it would be inequitable to retroactively apply any new SIP
requirements that were not applicable at the time the request was
submitted.    The D.C. Circuit has recognized the inequity in such
retroactive rulemaking, 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 additional SIP requirements under Subpart 2
that were not in effect at the time it submitted its redesignation
request.

With respect to subpart 2 requirements, if the Reading Area initially
had been classified under subpart the first two part D subpart 2
requirements applicable to the Reading Area under section 182(a) of the
CAA would be: (1) a base-year inventory requirement pursuant to section
182(a)(1) of the CAA, and, (2) the emissions statement requirement
pursuant to section 182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA.

As we have stated previously in this document, these requirements are
not yet due for purpose of redesignation of the Reading Area, but
nevertheless, Pennsylvania already has in its approved SIP an  emissions
statement rule for the 1-hour standard which covers all portions of the
Reading Area and which EPA believes satisfies the emissions statement
requirement for the 8-hour standard under section 182(a)(3)(B).  This
regulation is codified at Section 135.21 “Emission statements” in
Chapter 135 of 40 CFR 52.2020(c)(1); see also 60 FR 2881, January 12,
1995.  With respect to the base year inventory requirement, in this
notice of proposed rulemaking, EPA is proposing to approve the 2002 base
year inventory SIP concurrently with the maintenance plan as fulfilling
the requirements, if necessary, of both section 182(a)(1) and section
172(c)(3) of the CAA.

With respect to the 8-hour standard, EPA proposes to determine that
Pennsylvania’s SIP meets all applicable SIP requirements under Part D
of the CAA.  In addition to the fact that Part D requirements applicable
for purposes of redesignation did not become due prior to submission of
the redesignation request, EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret
the general conformity and NSR requirements 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 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 Reading Area, EPA has also determined that before
being redesignated, the Reading Area need not comply with the
requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to redesignation.  EPA
has determined that areas being redesignated need not comply with the
requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to redesignation,
provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the standard without
Part D NSR in effect.  The rationale for this position is described in a
memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled, ``Part D NSR Requirements
or Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.''  See rulemakings for
Detroit, Michigan (60 FR at 12467-68); Cleveland-Akron-Lorrain, Ohio (61
FR at 20458, 20469-70); Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665, 53669 October
23, 2001); Grand Rapids, Michigan (61 FR at 31831, 31834-37, June 21,
1996).  In the case of the Reading Area, the Chapter 127 Part D NSR
regulations in the Pennsylvania SIP (codified at 40 CFR 52.2020(c)(1))
explicitly apply the requirements for NSR in section 184 of the CAA to
ozone attainment areas within the OTR.  The OTR NSR requirements are
more stringent than that required for a subpart 1/basic 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area.  On October 19, 2001 (66 FR 53094), EPA fully
approved Pennsylvania’s NSR SIP revision consisting of
Pennsylvania’s Chapter 127 Part D NSR regulations that cover the
Reading Area.

EPA has also interpreted the section 184 OTR requirements, including the
NSR program, as not being applicable for purposes of redesignation.  The
rational for this is based on two factors.  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), even after redesignation.  Second, the
section 184 control measures are region-wide requirements and do not
apply to the Reading Area by virtue of the area’s designation and
classification.  Rather, section 184 measures are required in the
Reading Area because it is located in the OTR.  See 61 FR 53174,
53175-53176 (October 10, 1996) and 62 FR 24826, 24830-32 (May 7, 1997).

3.  Part D Nonattainment Area Requirements Under the 1-Hour Standard

As stated previously in this document, on May 7, 1997 (62 FR 24826), EPA
approved a request to redesignate the Reading area to attainment of the
1-hour ozone standard and approved a maintenance plan SIP revision.  In
order to redesignate the area to attainment of the 1-hour ozone
standard, EPA determined that Pennsylvania had fulfilled all Part D
requirements applicable to the Reading Area as a consequence of its
classification as a moderate ozone nonattainment.  See Reading final (62
FR 24826, May 7, 1997) and proposed rules (61 FR 53174, October 10,
1996).

With respect to the requirements under the 1-hour standard, the Reading
Area was an attainment area subject to a Clean Air Act section 175A
maintenance plan under the 1-hour standard.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 The
Court’s ruling in South Coast does not impact redesignation requests
for these types of areas.

First, there are no conformity requirements that are relevant for
redesignation requests, including the requirement to submit a
transportation conformity SIP.  As we have previously stated in this
document, EPA believes that 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. See 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,
FL redesignation).

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Second, with respect to the three other
anti-backsliding provisions for the 1-hour standard that the Court found
were not properly retained, the Reading Area is an attainment area
subject to a maintenance plan for the 1-hour standard, and the NSR,
contingency measure (pursuant to section 172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9)), and
fee provision requirements no longer apply to an area that has been
redesignated to attainment of the 1-hour standard.

Thus the decision in South Coast should not alter any requirements that
would preclude EPA from finalizing the redesignation of this area.

4.   Transport Region Requirements

All areas in the Ozone Transport Region (OTR), both attainment and
nonattainment, are subject to additional control requirements under
section 184 for the purpose of reducing interstate transport of
emissions that may contribute to downwind ozone nonattainment.  The
section 184 requirements include RACT, NSR, enhanced vehicle inspection
and maintenance, and Stage II vapor recovery or a comparable
measure.   In the case of the Reading 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 Reading 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
NSR, 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 nonattainment designation and
classification, and thus are properly considered not relevant to an
action changing an area's designation.  See 61 FR 53174 at 53175-53176
(October 10, 1996) and 62 FR 24826 at 24830-24832 (May 7, 1997).

5.  The Reading Area Has a Fully Approved SIP for the Purposes of
Redesignation

EPA has fully approved the Pennsylvania SIP for the purposes of
redesignation.  EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a
redesignation request.  Calcagni Memo, p. 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania
Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F. 3d 984, 989-90 (6th Cir. 1998), Wall
v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), plus any additional measures it
may approve in conjunction with a redesignation action.  See 68 FR at
25425 (May 12, 2003) and citations therein.  The Reading Area was a
1-hour maintenance area which had been a moderate nonattainment area at
the time of its designation as a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment area
on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857).  No Part D submittal requirements have
come due prior to the submittal of the 8-hour maintenance plan for the
area.  Therefore, all Part D submittal requirements have been fulfilled.
 Because there are no outstanding SIP submission requirements applicable
for the purposes of redesignation of the Reading Area, the applicable
implementation plan satisfies all pertinent SIP requirements.  As
indicated previously, EPA believes that the section 110 elements not
connected with Part D nonattainment plan submissions and not linked to
the area’s nonattainment status are not applicable requirements for
purposes of redesignation.  EPA also believes that Pennsylvania has
fulfilled all 8-hour Part D requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation.

C.  The Air Quality Improvement in the Reading 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 Reading Area is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the
SIP, Federal measures, and other State-adopted measures.  Emissions
reductions attributable to these rules are shown in Table 3.

Table 3: Total VOC and NOx Emissions for 2002 and 2004 in tons per day
(tpd)

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)

Year	Point	Area 	Nonroad	Mobile	Total

Year 2002	4.7	21.8	8.4	20.1	55.0

Year 2004	4.7	21.7	8.1	17.0	51.5

Diff. (02-04)	0.0	  0.1	0.3	  3.1	  3.5

Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)

Year	Point	Area 	Nonroad	Mobile	Total

Year 2002	14.5	2.1	10.9	34.1	61.6

Year 2004	16.0	2.1	10.3	29.8	58.2

Difference (02-04)	-1.5	0.0	  0.6	 4.3	  3.4

Between 2002 and 2004, VOC emissions were reduced by 3.5 tpd, and NOx
emissions were reduced by 3.3 tpd, due to the following permanent and
enforceable measures implemented in the Reading Area:

(1) Stationary Area Sources

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

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

(2) Highway Vehicle Sources

(a)  Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP), Tier 1 (56 FR 25724,
June 5, 1991) and Tier 2 (65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000)

(b)  Federal Heavy Duty Engines and Vehicles Standards (62 FR 54694,
October 21, 1997 and 65 FR 59896, October 6, 2000)

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

(d)  Vehicle Safety Inspection Program (70 FR 58313, October 6, 2005)

(3)  Nonroad Sources – Federal Nonroad Engine and Fuels (40 CFR parts
89 to 91, and 1039, 1048 and 1051)

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 Reading Area Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant to
Section 175A of the CAA

In conjunction with its request to redesignate the Reading Area to
attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, Pennsylvania submitted for
approval under section 175A of the CAA the January 25, 2007, maintenance
plan to fulfill section 175A(a) requirement for the 8-hour standard as
well as the section 175A(b) requirement for a 1-hour maintenance plan.
Pennsylvania submitted this SIP revision to provide for maintenance of
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Reading Area for at least 10 years after
redesignation and for continued maintenance of the 1-hour NAAQS until
2018 which is a total of 21 years after the area was redesignated to
attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS.   Once approved, the maintenance plan
for the ozone NAAQS will ensure that the SIP for the Reading Area meets
the requirements of the CAA regarding maintenance of the applicable
ozone standards including the 8-hour standard.

1.  What is required in a maintenance plan?

Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance plan
for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment.  Under
section 175A(a), 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.  Section 175A(b) requires that 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.  That is, the
maintenance demonstration under section 175A(b) must ensure maintenance
for a total of 20 years after redesignation to attainment.  For the
Reading Area the total demonstrated period of maintenance for the 1-hour
NAAQS under section 175A(b) would be until 2017 which is 20 years after
the area’s redesignation to attainment in 1997.  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 memorandum dated September 4, 1992, provides
additional guidance on the content of a maintenance plan.  An ozone
maintenance plan should address the following provisions:

(1) An attainment emissions inventory;

(2) A maintenance demonstration;

(3) A monitoring network;

(4) Verification of continued attainment; and

(5) A contingency plan.

2.  Analysis of the Reading 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 Reading
Area since it is a reasonable year within the 3-year attainment period
of 2003-2005 and accounts for reductions attributable to implementation
of the CAA requirements to date.   These 2004 levels of emissions are
representative of attainment of both the 1-hour and 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

PADEP prepared comprehensive VOC and NOx emissions inventories for the
Reading Area, including point, area, mobile on-road, and mobile non-road
sources for a base year of 2002.

To develop the NOx and VOC base year emissions inventories, PADEP used
the following approaches and sources of data:

(i) Point source emissions – Pennsylvania requires owners and
operators of larger facilities to submit annual production figures and
emission calculations each year.  Throughput data are multiplied by
emission factors from Factor Information Retrieval (FIRE) Data System
and EPA’s publication series AP-42 and are based on Source
Classification Code (SCC).  Each process has at least one SCC assigned
to it.  If the owners and operators of facilities provide more accurate
emission data based upon other factors, these emission estimates
supersede those calculated using SCC codes.

(ii) Area source emissions – Area source emissions are generally
estimated by multiplying an emission factor by some known indicator or
collective activity for each area source category at the county level.
Pennsylvania estimates emissions from area sources using emission
factors and SCC codes in a method similar to that used for stationary
point sources.  Emission factors may also be derived from research and
guidance documents if those documents are more accurate than FIRE and
AP-42 factors.  Throughput estimates are derived from county-level
activity data, by apportioning national and statewide activity data to
counties, from census numbers, and from county employee numbers.  County
employee numbers are based upon North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) codes to establish that those numbers are specific to the
industry covered.

(iii) On-road mobile sources - PADEP employs an emissions estimation
methodology that uses current EPA-approved highway vehicle emission
model, MOBILE 6.2, to estimate highway vehicle emissions.  The Reading
Area highway vehicle emissions in 2004 were estimated using MOBILE 6.2
and PENNDOT estimates of vehicles miles traveled (VMT) by vehicle type
and roadway type.

(iv) Mobile nonroad emissions – The 2002 emissions for the majority of
nonroad emission source categories were estimated using the EPA NONROAD
2005 model.  The NONROAD model estimates emissions for diesel, gasoline,
liquefied petroleum gasoline, and compressed natural gas-fueled nonroad
equipment types and includes growth factors.  The NONROAD model does not
estimate emissions from aircraft or locomotives.  For 2002 locomotive
emissions, PADEP projected emissions from a 1999 survey using national
fuel information and EPA emission and conversion factors.  There are no
commercial aircraft operations in the Reading Area.  For 2002 aircraft
emissions, PADEP estimated emissions using small aircraft operation
statistics from   HYPERLINK "http://www.airnav.com"  www.airnav.com ,
and emission factors and operational characteristics in the EPA-approved
model, Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS).

The 2004 attainment year VOC and NOx emissions for the Reading Area are
summarized along with the 2009 and 2018 projected emissions for this
area in Tables 4 and 5, which cover the demonstration of maintenance for
this area.  EPA has concluded that Pennsylvania has adequately derived
and documented the 2004 attainment year VOC and NOx emissions for this
area.

(b)  Maintenance Demonstration - On January 25, 2007, PADEP submitted a
SIP revision to supplement its January 25, 2007, redesignation request.
The submittal by PADEP consists of the maintenance plan as required by
section 175A of the CAA.  The Reading Area plan shows maintenance of the
8-hour and 1-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 Reading Area through the year 2018.  The
Reading Area maintenance demonstration need not be based on modeling.
See Wall v. EPA, supra; Sierra Club v. EPA, supra.  See also, 66 FR at
53099-53100; 68 FR at 25430-32.

Tables 4 and 5 specify the VOC and NOx emissions for the Reading Area
for 2004, 2009, and 2018.  PADEP chose 2009 as an interim year in the
10-year maintenance demonstration period to demonstrate that the VOC and
NOx emissions are not projected to increase above the 2004 attainment
level during the time of the 10-year maintenance period.

Table 4: Total VOC Emissions for 2004-2018 (tpd)

Source Category 	2004 VOC Emissions   	2009 VOC Emissions	2018 VOC
Emissions

Mobile*	17.0	13.1	  7.5

Nonroad	  8.1	  6.7	  5.6

Area	21.7	21.6	24.0

Point 	  4.7	  3.4	  4.3

Total 	51.5	44.8	41.4

* Includes safety margin for 2009 and 2018 identified in the motor
vehicle emission budgets for transportation conformity.

Table 5: Total NOx Emissions 2004-2018 (tpd)

Source Category 	2004 NOx Emissions    	2009 NOx Emissions	2018 NOx
Emissions

Mobile*	29.8	21.3	  9.0

Nonroad	10.3	  8.4	  5.4

Area	  2.1	  2.2	  2.3

Point	16.0	16.8	19.2

Total 	58.2	48.7	35.9

* Includes safety margin for 2009 and 2018 identified in the motor
vehicle emission budgets for transportation conformity.

The following 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:

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

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

(3)  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:

(1) FMVCP for passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks and cleaner
gasoline (2009 and 2018 fleet) – Tier 1 and Tier 2;

(2) NLEV Program, which includes the Pennsylvania’s Clean Vehicle
Program for passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks (69 FR 72564,
December 28, 1999);

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

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

(5) Pennsylvania’s vehicle emission inspection/maintenance program
(October 6, 2005, 70 FR 58313).

In addition to the permanent and enforceable measures, the Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR), promulgated May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162) should
have positive impacts on Pennsylvania’s air quality.  CAIR, which will
be implemented in the eastern portion of the country in two phases (2009
and 2015) should reduce long range transport of ozone precursors, which
will have a beneficial effect on the air quality in the Reading Area.

Pennsylvania and other nearby states are required to adopt a regulation
implementing the requirements of CAIR or an equivalent program.  On
April 28, 2006 (71 FR 25328), EPA promulgated Federal Implementation
Plans (FIPs) to reduce the interstate transport of NOx and sulfur
dioxides that contribute significantly to nonattainment and maintenance
8-hour ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS.  Because Pennsylvania will not adopt its
own CAIR requirements and obtain approval of the required SIP revision
by September 2006, the FIP will become operative, imposing the Federal
program upon CAIR-affected electric generating units in Pennsylvania.
Therefore, allowances for CAIR-related sources will be limited to no
more than the allowances issued pursuant to the FIP but may purchase
additional allowances under the cap-and-trade rule in the FIP.  The
Reading Area has one source that is directly regulated by CAIR.  For the
maintenance demonstration, Pennsylvania did not rely upon any reductions
from CAIR at this facility.  However, the quality of air transported
from upwind sources into the county would be improved.

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 Reading Area.

(c)  Monitoring Network - There is currently one monitor measuring ozone
in the Reading Area.  Pennsylvania will continue to operate its current
air quality monitor in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.

(d)  Verification of Continued Attainment - The Commonwealth will track
the attainment status of the ozone NAAQS in the Reading Area by
reviewing air quality and emissions during the maintenance period.  The
Commonwealth will perform an annual evaluation of two key factors, 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 exceed 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 Reading Area to stay in compliance with the 8-hour
ozone standard after redesignation depends upon VOC and NOx emissions in
the area remaining at or below 2004 levels.  The Commonwealth’s
maintenance plan projects VOC and NOx emissions to decrease and stay
below 2004 levels through the year 2018.  The Commonwealth’s
maintenance plan outlines the procedures for the adoption and
implementation of contingency measures to further reduce emissions
should a violation occur.

Contingency measures will be considered if for two consecutive years the
fourth highest eight-hour ozone concentrations at the Reading Area
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 analyze the conditions leading to the
excessive ozone levels and evaluate what measures might be most
effective in correcting the excessive ozone levels.  PADEP will also
analyze the potential emissions effect of Federal, state and local
measure that have been adopted but no yet implemented at the time of
excessive ozone levels occurred.  PADEP will then begin the process of
implementing any selected measures.

Contingency measures will be considered in the event that a violation of
the 8-hour ozone standard occurs at any monitor in the Reading Area.  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 Reading
Area will include, but not limited to the following:

Regulatory measures:

Additional controls on consumer products

Additional control 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 onroad or offroad fleets.

Idling reduction technology for Class 2 yard locomotives.

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

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

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

The following schedule applies to the implementation of the regulatory
contingency measures:

Within 1 month of the trigger, submit request to begin regulatory
development process.

Within 3 months of the trigger, review of regulation by Air Quality
Technical Advisory Committee (AQTAC), Citizens Advisory Council (CAC)
and other advisory committees as appropriate.

Within 6 months of the trigger, Environmental Quality Board (EQB)
meeting/action.

Within 8 months of the trigger, publish in the Pennsylvania Bulletin for
comment as proposed rulemaking.

Within 10 months of the trigger, public hearing takes place and comment
period on proposed rule closes.

Within 11 months of the trigger, House and Senate Standing Committees
and Independent Regulatory Review Commission (IRRC) comment on proposed
rule.

Within 13 months of the trigger, AQTAC, CAC and other committees review
responses to comments and draft final rulemaking.

Within 16 months of the trigger, EQB meeting/action.

Within 17 months of the trigger, IRRC action on rulemaking.

Within 18 months of the trigger, Attorney General’s review/action.

Within 19 months of the trigger, publication in the Pennsylvania
Bulletin as a final rulemaking and submit to EPA as a SIP revision.  The
regulation would become effective upon publication in the Pennsylvania
Bulletin.

The following schedule applies to the implementation of non-regulatory
contingency measures:

Within 2 months of the trigger:  Identify stakeholders for potential
non-regulatory measures.

Within 3 months of the trigger, if funding is necessary, identify
potential sources of funding and the timeframe under which funds would
be available.  In addition to non-Title V Clean Air funds, the following
program may be able to provide funding:  for transportation projects,
the Federal Highway Administration, as allocated to the Northern Tier
Rural Planning Organization; for projects which will also have an energy
efficient co-benefit, the Pennsylvania Energy Harvest program; for
projects which would be under taken by small business and are pollution
prevention projects, the Small Business Advantage Grant and Small
Business Pollution Prevention Loan programs; for projects which will
involve alternative fuels for vehicles/refueling operations, the
Alternative Fuel Incentive Grant program; for projects involving diesel
emissions, Federal Energy Policy Act diesel reduction funds allocated to
Pennsylvania or for which Pennsylvania or project sponsors may apply
under a competitive process.

Within 9 months of the trigger, enter into agreements with implementing
organizations if state loans or grants are involved.  Quantify projected
emission benefits.

Within 12months of the trigger, submit a revised SIP to EPA.

Within 12-24 months of the trigger, implement strategies and projects.

(f)  Revisions to the 1-Hour Maintenance Plan

In addition to demonstrating continued maintenance until 2018, the
January 25, 2007, maintenance plan also amends the February 3, 1997,
maintenance plan in the approved SIP at 40 CFR 52.2020(e)(1)for the
Reading Area.  Pennsylvania’s January 25, 2007 maintenance plan SIP
revision for the Reading Area amends the approved 1-hour maintenance
plan by removing I/M from the contingency plan.  The contingency
measures in the February 3, 1997 maintenance plan would be replaced by
those in the January 25, 2007, maintenance plan.  These contingency
measures would be implemented only in response to recorded exceedances
or violations of the 8-hour ozone standards and no longer tied to
exceedances or violations of the 1-hour ozone standard.

With regard to the first change, in December 2003, Pennsylvania
commenced implementation of an OTR enhanced I/M program in Berks County.
 EPA believes that the actual implementation of the OTR enhanced I/M
program means that the contingency measure of a basic I/M program is no
longer available as a contingency.  The maintenance demonstration relies
upon the OTR enhanced I/M program.  EPA believes that the January 25,
2007 maintenance plan SIP revision has an adequate suite of contingency
measures.  Therefore, for these reasons, EPA believes that the
contingency measures plan for the Reading Area currently does not need
to contain a basic I/M program since the OTR enhanced program has been
implemented.

With regard to removal of the 1-hour  contingency measure triggers from
the maintenance plan , under 40 CFR 51.905(e) of the April 30, 2004,
Phase 1 final rule, EPA may approve a SIP revision requesting the
removal of the obligation to implement contingency measures upon a
violation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS when the State submits and EPA
approves an attainment demonstration for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for an
area initially designated nonattainment for the 8-hour NAAQS or a
maintenance SIP for the 8-hour NAAQS for an area initially designated
attainment for the 8-hour NAAQS.   EPA believes the rationale of
51.905(e) in relieving areas designated under the 8-hour standard of
their 1-hour maintenance plan triggers analogously applies to areas that
are being  redesignated  as attainment with the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
Accordingly, EPA is proposing to relieve the Reading Area of its
maintenance plan obligations with respect to implementing contingency
measures in the event of a violation of the 1-hour standard.
Furthermore, to the extent that 40 CFR 51.905(e) of the Phase 1 final
rule may be  vacated  by the South Coast  decision, EPA believes there
is an alternate basis for allowing the Commonwealth  to remove the
1-hour triggers from the SIP-approved maintenance for the Reading Area.
EPA has determined that the  8-hour NAAQS  provides increased public
health protection as compared to the 1-hour ozone standard.  See 62 FR
at 38859 (July 18, 1997).  Because the 8-hour standard is more stringent
than the 1-hour standard, a maintenance plan with triggers tied to the
8-hour standard will be more protective of public health than a
maintenance plan with contingency measure triggers tied to the 1-hour
standard.  This greater protectiveness of the 8-hour standard provides
an additional justification for  removing the 1-hour triggers from the
maintenance plan.

(g)  Summary of EPA’s Evaluation of the Maintenance Plan

EPA concludes that the January 25, 2007 maintenance plan meets the
requirements of section 175A of the CAA and the revisions to the 1-hour
maintenance plan otherwise meets the requirements of the CAA including
section 110(l) as it does not interfere with any applicable requirement
such as those concerning attainment, reasonable further progress towards
attainment or maintenance.

VII. Does the Maintenance Plan Establish and Identify Adequate and
Approvable Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for the Reading Area?

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.  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 assuring
conformity of such transportation activities to a SIP.

When reviewing submitted “control strategy” SIPs or maintenance
plans containing MVEBs, EPA must affirmatively find the MVEB budget
contained therein “adequate” for use in determining transportation
conformity.  After EPA affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB is
adequate for transportation conformity purposes, that MVEB can be used
by State and Federal agencies in determining whether proposed
transportation projects “conform” to the SIP as required by section
176(c) of the 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 follows this guidance and rulemaking in making
its adequacy determinations.

The MVEBs for the Reading 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 following example is for the 2018 safety margin:  the
Reading Area first attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS during the 2002 to
2004 time period.  The Commonwealth used 2004 as the year to determine
attainment levels of emissions for the Reading Area.

The total emissions from point, area, mobile on-road, and mobile
non-road sources in 2004 were 51.5 tpd of VOC and 58.2 tpd of NOx.
PADEP projected emissions out to the year 2018 and obtained totals of
40.4 tpd of VOC and 35.3 tpd of NOx from all sources in the Reading
Area.  The safety margin for the Reading Area for 2018 would be the
difference between these amounts.  This difference is 11.1 tpd of VOC
and 22.9 tpd of NOx.  The emissions up to the level of the attainment
year including the safety margins are projected to maintain the area's
air quality consistent with the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.  The safety margin
is the extra emissions reduction below the attainment levels that can be
allocated for emissions by various sources as long as the total emission
levels are maintained at or below the attainment levels.  Table 6 shows
the safety margins for the 2009 and 2018 years.

Table 6:  2009 and 2018 Safety Margins for the Reading Area

Inventory Year	VOC Emissions (tpd)	NOx Emissions (tpd)

2004 Attainment	51.5	58.2

2009 Interim	43.8	48.1

2009 Safety Margin	 7.7	10.1

2004 Attainment	51.5	58.2

2018 Final	40.4	35.3

2018 Safety Margin	11.1	22.9

PADEP allocated 1.0 tpd) VOC and 0.6 tpd NOx to the 2009 interim VOC
projected on-road mobile source emissions projection and the 2009
interim NOx projected on-road mobile source emissions projection to
arrive at the 2009 MVEBs.  For the 2018 MVEBs the PADEP allocated 1.0
tpd VOC and 0.6 tpd NOx from the 2018 safety margins to arrive at the
2018 MVEBs.  Once allocated to the mobile source budgets these portions
of the safety margins are no longer available, and may no longer be
allocated to any other source category.  Table 7 shows the final 2009
and 2018 MVEBS for the Reading Area.

Table 7:  2009 and 2018 Final MVEBs for the Reading Area tons per day
(rounded to nearest 0.1 tpd)

Inventory Year	VOC Emissions 	NOx Emissions

2009 projected on-road mobile source projected emissions	12.1	20.7

2009 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs	  1.0	 0.6

2009 MVEBs	13.1	21.3

2018 projected on-road mobile source projected emissions	 6.5	  8.4

2018 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs	 1.0	  0.6

2018 MVEBs	 7.5	  9.0

C.  Why Are the MVEBs Approvable?

The 2009 and 2018 MVEBs for the Reading Area are approvable because the
MVEBs for NOx and VOC, including the allocated safety margins, continue
to maintain the total emissions at or below the attainment year
inventory levels as required by the transportation conformity
regulations.

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

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

If EPA receives adverse written comments with respect to the proposed
approval of the Reading Area MVEBs, or any other aspect of our proposed
approval of this updated maintenance plan, we will respond to the
comments on the MVEBs in our final action or proceed with the adequacy
process as a separate action.  Our action on the Reading Area MVEBs will
also be announced on EPA's conformity Web site:    HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/oms/traq"  http://www.epa.gov/oms/traq , (once
there, click on the “Conformity” button, then look for “Adequacy
Review of SIP Submissions for Conformity”).

VIII.   Proposed Actions

EPA is proposing to determine that the Reading Area has attained the
8-hour ozone NAAQS.  EPA is also proposing to approve the
Commonwealth’s January 25, 2007, request for the Reading Area to be
designated to attainment of the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone.  EPA has
evaluated Pennsylvania’s redesignation request and determined that it
meets the redesignation criteria set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of
the CAA.  EPA believes that the redesignation request and monitoring
data demonstrate that the area has attained the 8-hour ozone standard.
The final approval of this redesignation request would change the
designation of the Reading Area from nonattainment to attainment for the
8-hour ozone standard.  EPA is also proposing to approve the associated
maintenance plan and the 2002 base year inventory for Reading Area,
submitted on January 25, 2007, as revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP.
EPA is proposing to approve the maintenance plan for the Reading Area
because it meets the requirements of section 175A of the CAA as
described previously in this notice.  EPA is also proposing to approve
the MVEBs submitted by Pennsylvania for the Reading 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.  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 Reading 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 22, 2007				Donald S. Welsh

						Regional Administrator,

						Region III.

 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   4

  PAGE   10

  PAGE   41

  PAGE   42

  PAGE   53


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 8 (Thursday, January 11, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 1348]
[FR Doc No: 2018-00326]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission received the following Natural Gas
Pipeline Rate and Refund Report Filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP18-319-000.
    Applicants: Northern Natural Gas Company.
    Description: Northern Natural Gas Company submits tariff filing per
154.204: 20180104 Negotiated Rate to be effective 1/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 1/4/18.
    Accession Number: 20180104-5151.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/16/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-320-000.
    Applicants: Rockies Express Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Rockies Express Pipeline LLC submits tariff filing per
154.204: Neg Rate 2018-01-04 BP, Encana to be effective 1/4/2018.
    Filed Date: 1/4/18.
    Accession Number: 20180104-5166.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/16/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-851-001.
    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.
    Description: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP submits tariff filing
per 154.203: Compliance Filing in Docket No. RP17-851-000 to be
effective 12/21/2017.
    Filed Date: 1/5/18.
    Accession Number: 20180105-5018.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. ET 1/17/2018.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: January 5, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-00326 Filed 1-10-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P