	ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

	40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

	[EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0323; FRL-         ]

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

AGENCY:  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:  Final rule.

SUMMARY:  EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.  The Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) is requesting that the
Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle ozone nonattainment area (“Harrisburg
Area”) be redesignated as attainment for the 8-hour ozone ambient air
quality standard (NAAQS).  EPA is approving the ozone redesignation
request for the Harrisburg Area.  In conjunction with its redesignation
request, PADEP submitted a SIP revision consisting of a maintenance plan
for the Harrisburg Area that provides for continued attainment of the
8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years after redesignation.  EPA is
approving the 8-hour maintenance plan.  PADEP also submitted a 2002
base-year inventory for the Harrisburg Area which EPA is approving.  In
addition, EPA is approving the adequacy determination for the motor
vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) that are identified in the Harrisburg
Area maintenance plan for purposes of transportation conformity, and is
approving those MVEBs.  EPA is approving the redesignation request, and
the maintenance plan and the 2002 base-year emissions inventory as
revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP in accordance with the requirements of
the Clean Air Act (CAA).

EFFECTIVE DATE:  This final rule is effective on [insert date of
publication] pursuant to the authority of 5 USC 553(d)(1).

ADDRESSES:  EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0323.  All documents in the docket are listed in
the www.regulations.gov website.  Although listed in the electronic
docket, some information is not publicly available, i.e., confidential
business information (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 through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy for public inspection 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
Resources Bureau of Air Quality Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market
Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105. 

 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Ellen Wentworth (215) 814-2034, or by
e-mail at wentworth.ellen@epa.gov.  

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  

I.  Background	

On June 1, 2007 (72 FR 30521), EPA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPR) for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.  The NPR proposed
approval of Pennsylvania’s redesignation request, a SIP revision that
establishes a maintenance plan for the Harrisburg Area that provides for
continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years
after redesignation, and a 2002 base-year emissions inventory.  The
formal SIP revision was submitted by PADEP on March 27, 2007.  Other
specific requirements of Pennsylvania’s redesignation request, the SIP
revision for the maintenance plan, and the rationale for EPA’s
proposed actions are explained in the NPR and will not be restated here.
 No public comments were received on the NPR.   

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).  On June
8, 2007, in South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. v. EPA, Docket No.
04-1201, in response to several petitions for rehearing, the D.C.
Circuit clarified that the Phase 1 Rule was vacated only with regard to
those parts of the rule that had been successfully challenged. 
Therefore, the Phase 1 Rule provisions related to classifications for
areas currently classified under subpart 2 of Title I, part D of the Act
as 8-hour nonattainment areas, the 8-hour attainment dates, and the
timing for emissions reductions needed for attainment of the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS remain effective.  The June 8 decision left intact the
Court’s rejection of EPA’s reasons for implementing the 8-hour
standard in certain nonattainment areas under subpart 1 in lieu of
subpart 2.  By limiting the vacatur, the Court let stand EPA’s
revocation of the 1-hour standard and those anti-backsliding provisions
of the Phase 1 Rule that had not been successfully challenged.  The June
8 decision reaffirmed the December 22, 2006 decision that EPA had
improperly failed to retain 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; and (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.  In addition the June 8 decision
clarified that the Court’s reference to conformity requirements for
anti-backsliding purposes was limited to requiring the continued use of
1-hour motor vehicle emissions budgets until 8-hour budgets were
available for 8-hour conformity determinations, which is already
required under EPA’s conformity regulations.  The Court thus clarified
that 1-hour conformity determinations are not required for
anti-backsliding purposes.

For the reasons set forth in the proposal, EPA does not believe that the
Court’s rulings alter any requirements relevant to this redesignation
action so as to preclude redesignation, and do not prevent EPA from
finalizing this redesignation.  EPA believes that the Court’s December
22, 2006 and June 8, 2007 decisions impose no impediment to moving
forward with the redesignation of this Area to attainment, because even
in light of the Court’s decisions, redesignation is appropriate under
the relevant redesignation provisions of the Act and longstanding
policies regarding redesignation requests.

In its proposal, EPA proposed to find that the Area had satisfied the
requirements under the 1-hour standard whether the 1-hour standard was
deemed to be reinstated or whether the Court’s decision on the
petition for rehearing was modified to require something less than
compliance with all applicable 1-hour requirements.  Because EPA
proposed to find that the Area satisfied the requirements under either
scenario, EPA is proceeding to finalize the redesignation and to
conclude that the Area has met the requirements under the 1-hour
standard applicable for purposes of redesignation under the 8-hour
standard.  These include the provisions of EPA’s anti-backsliding
rules, as well as the additional anti-backsliding provisions identified
by the Court in its rulings.  In its June 8, 2007 decision, the Court
limited its vacatur so as to uphold those provisions of the
anti-backsliding requirements that were not successfully challenged. 
Therefore, EPA finds that the Area has met the anti-backsliding
requirements, see 40 CFR 51.900 et seq; 70 FR 30592, 30604 (May 26,
2005) which apply by virtue of the Area’s classification for the
1-hour ozone NAAQS, as well as the four additional anti-backsliding
provisions identified by the Court, or that such requirements are not
applicable for purposes of redesignation.  In addition, with respect to
the requirement for transportation conformity under the 1-hour standard,
the Court in its June 8 decision clarified that for those areas with
1-hour motor vehicle emissions budgets, anti-backsliding requires only
that those 1-hour budgets must be used for 8-hour conformity
determinations until replaced by 8-hour budgets.  To meet this
requirement, conformity determinations in such areas must comply with
the applicable requirements of EPA’s conformity regulations at 40 CFR
part 93.  The Court clarified that 1-hour conformity determinations are
not required for anti-backsliding purposes.

II.  Final Action

EPA is approving the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s redesignation
request, maintenance plan, and the 2002 base-year emissions inventory
because the requirements for approval have been satisfied.  EPA has
evaluated Pennsylvania’s redesignation request that was submitted on
March 27, 2007 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
Harrisburg Area has attained the 8-hour ozone standard.  The final
approval of this redesignation request will change the designation of
the Harrisburg Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour
ozone standard.  EPA is approving the maintenance plan for the
Harrisburg Area submitted on March 27, 2007 as a revision to the
Pennsylvania SIP.  EPA is also approving the MVEBs submitted by PADEP in
conjunction with its redesignation request.  In addition, EPA is
approving the 2002 base-year emissions inventory as a revision to the
Pennsylvania SIP submitted by PADEP on March 27, 2007.  In this final
rulemaking, EPA is notifying the public that we have found that the
MVEBs for NOx and VOCs in the Harrisburg Area for the 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan are adequate and approved for conformity purposes.  As
a result of our finding, the Harrisburg Area must use the MVEBs from the
submitted 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for future conformity
determinations.  The adequate and approved MVEBs are provided in the
following table:

Table 1:  Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in Kilograms per day (Tons per
Day-rounded) 



Harrisburg Area Transportation Study (HATS) - Cumberland, Dauphin, and
Perry Counties

Year	VOC	NOx

2009 	23,014   (25.4)	41,917  (46.2)

2018	16,136   (17.8)	18,409  (20.3)

 Lebanon County MPO (LEBCO)

Year	VOC	NOx

2009 	 4,301    (4.7)	 8,928    (9.8)

2018	 2,512    (2.8)	 3,684    (4.1)

* Note:  Tons per day are informational only.  Differences occur due to
rounding.

The Harrisburg Area is subject to the CAA’s requirement for the basic
nonattainment areas until and unless it is redesignated to attainment.

III.   Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A.   General Requirements 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action
is not a "significant regulatory action" and therefore is not subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget.  For this reason, this
action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, "Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use" (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).  This action merely approves state law
as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law.  Redesignation of an area to
attainment under section 107(d)(3)(e) of the Clean Air Act does not
impose any new requirements on small entities.  Redesignation is an
action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not
impose any new regulatory requirements on sources.  Accordingly, the
Administrator certifies that this final 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
approves 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 final rule also does not have
tribal implications because it will 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). 
Because this action affects the status of a geographical area, does not
impose any new requirements on sources, or allows the state to avoid
adopting or implementing other requirements, this action also does not
have Federalism implications because it does not 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).  This action
merely approves 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 rule also is
not subject to Executive Order 13045 “Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (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.  This rule does not impose an
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 USC. 3501 et seq.

B.   Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the
rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to
each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United
States.  EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register.  This rule is not a
(major rule( as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

C.  Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial
review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of
Appeals for the appropriate circuit by [insert date 60 days from date of
publication of this document in the Federal Register].  Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. 

This action, approving the redesignation of the Harrisburg Area to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the associated maintenance plan,
the 2002 base-year emissions inventory, and the MVEBs identified in the
maintenance plan, may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce
its requirements.  (See section 307(b)(2).)

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

______________                      		____________/s/_______________    

Dated:  July 16, 2007             			Donald S. Welsh,                   
             								Regional Administrator,

                                  				Region III.



40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52 - [AMENDED] 

1.  The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart NN(Pennsylvania

2.  In ( 52.2020, the table in paragraph (e)(1) is amended by adding an
entry for the 8-hour Ozone Maintenance Plan and 2002 Base Year Emissions
Inventory for the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle, Pennsylvania Area at the
end of the table to read as follows:

( 52.2020  	Identification of plan.

* 	* 	* 	* 	*

(e) * * *  

     (1) * * *	

Name of non-regulatory SIP revision	Applicable geographic area	State
submittal date	EPA approval date	Additional explanation

*            *             *            *            *            *     
     *

8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan and 2002 Base Year Emissions Inventory
Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle, PA:

Cumberland County

Dauphin County

Lebanon County

Perry County	03/27/07	[Insert Federal Register] publication date]
[Insert page number where the document begins]

	

	

PART 81- [AMENDED]

The authority citation for Part 81 continues to read as follows:  

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

In §81.339, the table entitled “Pennsylvania- Ozone (8-Hour
Standard)” is amended by revising the entry for the
Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle, Pennsylvania Area to read as follows:

§81.339                    Pennsylvania

*          *          *          *          *

Pennsylvania – Ozone (8-Hour Standard)

Designated Area	Designationa	Category/Classification

	Date1	Type	Date1	Type

*           *           *           *           *           *          
*

Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle PA:

Cumberland County

Dauphin County

Lebanon County

Perry County	[Insert date of publication]	Attainment



*           *           *           *           *           *          
*



aIncludes Indian County located in each county or area, except otherwise
noted.

1This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.

*           *           *           *           *

 PAGE   

 PAGE  3 

