
[Federal Register: September 25, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 185)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 54390-54402]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr25se07-21]                         

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0605; FRL-8473-2]

 
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Pennsylvania; Redesignation of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 8-Hour Ozone 
Nonattainment Area to Attainment and Approval of the Maintenance Plan 
and 2002 Base-Year Inventory

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a redesignation request and State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of 
Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection 
(PADEP) is requesting that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre ozone 
nonattainment area (``Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area'' or ``Area'') be 
redesignated as attainment for the 8-hour ozone national ambient air 
quality standard (NAAQS). The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area is comprised 
of Lackawanna, Luzerne, Monroe and Wyoming Counties. EPA is proposing 
to approve the ozone redesignation request for the Scranton/Wilkes-
Barre Area. In conjunction with its redesignation request, the 
Commonwealth submitted a SIP revision consisting of a maintenance plan 
for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area that provides for continued 
attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years after 
redesignation. EPA is proposing to make a determination that the 
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, based 
upon three years of complete, quality-assured ambient air quality 
monitoring data for 2004-2006. EPA's proposed approval of the 8-hour 
ozone redesignation request is based on its determination that the 
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area has met the criteria for redesignation to 
attainment specified in the Clean Air Act. In addition, the 
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has also submitted a 2002 base-year 
inventory for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area, and EPA is proposing to 
approve that inventory for the Area as a SIP revision. EPA is also 
providing information on the status of its adequacy determination for 
the motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) that are identified in the 
maintenance plan for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area for purposes of 
transportation conformity, and is proposing to approve those MVEBs. EPA 
is proposing approval of the redesignation request, the maintenance 
plan, and 2002 base-year inventory SIP revisions in accordance with the 
requirements of the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before October 25, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2007-0605 by one of the following methods:
    A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    B. E-mail: powers.marilyn@epa.gov.
    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0605, Marilyn Powers, Acting Chief, Air 
Quality Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address. 
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of 
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of 
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2007-0605. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online 
at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site 
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any 
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA

[[Page 54391]]

cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot 
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your 
comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, 
any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically in http://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the 
Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 
III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the 
State submittal are available at the Pennsylvania Department of 
Environmental Protection Bureau of Air Quality Control, P.O. Box 8468, 
400 Market Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Rehn, (215) 814-2176, or by e-
mail at rehn.brian@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

Table of Contents

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

I. What Are the Clean Air Actions EPA Is Proposing To Take?

    On June 12, 2007, the PADEP formally submitted a request to 
redesignate the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area from nonattainment to 
attainment of the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone. Concurrently, Pennsylvania 
submitted a maintenance plan for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area as a 
SIP revision to ensure continued attainment in the Area over the next 
11 years. PADEP also submitted a 2002 base-year inventory for the 
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area as a SIP revision. The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 
Area is comprised of Lackawanna, Luzerne, Monroe, and Wyoming Counties. 
It is currently designated a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. EPA 
is proposing to determine that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 Clean Air 
Act. EPA is, therefore, proposing to approve the redesignation request 
to change the designation of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area from 
nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also 
proposing to approve the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre maintenance plan as a 
SIP revision for the Area (such approval being one of the Clean Air Act 
criteria for redesignation to attainment status). The maintenance plan 
is designed to ensure continued attainment in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 
Area for the next 11 years. EPA is also proposing to approve the 2002 
base-year inventory for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area as a SIP 
revision. Additionally, EPA is announcing its action on the adequacy 
process for the MVEBs identified in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 
maintenance plan, and proposing to approve the MVEBs identified for 
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) 
for the Area for transportation conformity purposes.

II. What Is the Background for These Proposed Actions?

A. General

    Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources. Rather, 
emissions of NOX and VOC react in the presence of sunlight 
to form ground-level ozone. The air pollutants NOX and VOC 
are referred to as precursors of ozone. The Clean Air Act establishes a 
process for air quality management through the attainment and 
maintenance of the NAAQS.
    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone standard 
of 0.08 parts per million (ppm). This new standard is more stringent 
than the previous 1-hour standard. EPA designated, as nonattainment, 
any area violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the air quality data 
for the three years of 2001-2003. These were the most recent three 
years of data at the time EPA designated 8-hour areas. The Scranton/
Wilkes-Barre Area was designated a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment 
area in a Federal Register notice signed on April 15, 2004 and 
published on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857), based on its exceedance of 
the 8-hour health-based standard for ozone during the years 2001-2003.
    On April 30, 2004, EPA issued a final rule (69 FR 23951, 23996) to 
revoke the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area (as 
well as most other areas of the country), effective June 15, 2005. See 
40 CFR 50.9(b); 69 FR at 23996 (April 30, 2004); 70 FR 44470 (August 3, 
2005).
    However, on December 22, 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 
District of Columbia Circuit vacated EPA's Phase 1 Implementation Rule 
for the 8-hour Ozone Standard. (69 FR 23951, April 30, 2004). South 
Coast Air Quality Management Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 
2006) (hereafter ``South Coast''). 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 Clean Air 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 
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 Clean Air 
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

[[Page 54392]]

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. 
Elsewhere in this document, mainly in section VI. B. ``The Scranton/
Wilkes-Barre Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 
and Part D of the Clean Air Act and has a Fully Approved SIP Under 
Section 110(k) of the Clean Air Act,'' EPA discusses its rationale why 
the decision in South Coast is not an impediment to redesignating the 
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area to attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    The Clean Air Act, 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. In 2004, the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area was 
classified a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment area based on air quality 
monitoring data from 2001-2003. Therefore, the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 
Area 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 indicates that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area has a 
design value of 0.075 ppm for the 3-year period of 2004-2006, using 
complete, quality-assured data. Therefore, the ambient ozone data for 
the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area indicates no violations of the 8-hour 
ozone standard.

B. The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area

    The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area consists of Lackawanna, Luzerne, 
Monroe, and Wyoming Counties in Pennsylvania. Prior to its designation 
as an 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area 
was a marginal 1-hour ozone nonattainment Area (which included Columbia 
County, in addition to those counties comprising the 8-hour ozone 
nonattainment area). Therefore, the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area was 
subject to requirements for marginal nonattainment areas pursuant to 
section 182(a) of the Clean Air Act. See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 
1991). EPA determined that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 1-hour ozone 
nonattainment Area had attained the 1-hour ozone NAAQS by the November 
15, 1993 attainment date (60 FR 3349, January 17, 1995).
    On June 12, 2007, the PADEP requested that the Scranton/Wilkes-
Barre Area be redesignated to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. 
The redesignation request included three years of complete, quality-
assured data for the period of 2004-2006, indicating that the 8-hour 
NAAQS for ozone had been achieved in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area. 
The data satisfies the Clean Air Act requirements that the 3-year 
average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone 
concentration (commonly referred to as the area's design value), must 
be less than or equal to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when rounding is 
considered). Under the Clean Air Act, a nonattainment area may be 
redesignated if sufficient complete, quality-assured data is available 
to determine that the area attained the standard and the area meets the 
other Clean Air Act redesignation requirements set forth in section 
107(d)(3)(E).

III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?

    The Clean Air Act provides the requirements for redesignating a 
nonattainment area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) 
allows for redesignation, providing that:
    (1) EPA determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS;
    (2) EPA has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for 
the area under section 110(k);
    (3) EPA determines that the improvement in air quality is due to 
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from 
implementation of the applicable SIP and applicable Federal air 
pollutant control regulations and other permanent and enforceable 
reductions;
    (4) EPA has fully approved a maintenance plan for the area as 
meeting the requirements of section 175A; and
    (5) The State containing such area has met all requirements 
applicable to the area under section 110 and Part D.
    EPA provided guidance on redesignations in the General Preamble for 
the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act, on April 16, 1992 
(57 FR 13498), and supplemented this guidance on April 28, 1992 (57 FR 
18070). EPA has provided further guidance on processing redesignation 
requests in the following documents:
     ``Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value Calculations,'' 
Memorandum from Bill Laxton, June, 18, 1990;
     ``Maintenance Plans for Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon 
Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief, 
Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, April 30, 1992;
     ``Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) 
Redesignations,'' Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon 
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 1992;
     ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas 
to Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 
Management Division, September 4, 1992;
     ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in 
Response to Clean Air Act (Act) Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John 
Calcagni Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;
     ``Technical Support Documents (TSDs) for Redesignation 
Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from 
G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17, 
1993;
     ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas 
Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and 
Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) on 
or after November 15, 1992,'' Memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, 
Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, September 17, 
1993;
     Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, Acting Director, Air 
Quality Management Division, to Air Division Directors, Regions 1-10, 
``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for Ozone and 
CO Nonattainment Areas,'' dated November 30, 1993;
     ``Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for 
Areas

[[Page 54393]]

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 June 12, 2007, the PADEP requested redesignation of the 
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. 
On June 12, 2007, PADEP submitted a maintenance plan for the Scranton/
Wilkes-Barre Area as a SIP revision, to ensure continued attainment of 
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS over the next 11 years, until 2018. PADEP also 
submitted a 2002 base-year inventory concurrently with its maintenance 
plan as a SIP revision. EPA has determined that the Scranton/Wilkes-
Barre Area has attained the 8-hour ozone standard and has met the 
requirements for redesignation set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E).

V. What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?

    Approval of the redesignation request would change the official 
designation of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area for the next 11 years, 
until 2018. The maintenance plan includes contingency measures to 
remedy any future violations of the 8-hour NAAQS (should they occur), 
and identifies the NOX and VOC MVEBs for transportation conformity 
purposes for the years 2009 and 2018. These MVEBs are displayed in the 
following table:

Table 1.--Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets, in Tons
                          per Summer Day (tpsd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Year                            VOC        NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2009.............................................       25.2       48.3
2018..............................................       16.9       23.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    EPA is proposing to determine that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area 
has attained the 8-hour ozone standard, and that all other 
redesignation criteria have been met. The following is a description of 
how the PADEP's June 12, 2007 submittal satisfies the requirements of 
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act.

A. The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area Has Attained the 8-Hour NAAQS

    EPA is proposing to determine that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area 
has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. For ozone, an area may be 
considered to be attaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS if there are no 
violations, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.10 and Appendix 
I of Part 50, based on three complete, consecutive calendar years of 
quality-assured air quality monitoring data. To attain this standard, 
the design value, which is the 3-year average of the fourth-highest 
daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations measured at each 
monitor, within the area, over each year must not exceed the ozone 
standard of 0.08 ppm. Based on the rounding convention described in 40 
CFR part 50, Appendix I, the standard is attained if the design value 
is 0.084 ppm or below. The data must be collected and quality-assured 
in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and recorded in the Air Quality 
System (AQS). The monitors generally should have remained at the same 
location for the duration of the monitoring period required for 
demonstrating attainment.
    In the Scranton-Wilkes-Barre Area, there were four ozone monitors 
that measured ambient ozone air quality between 2004 and 2006. Two of 
these monitors are located in Lackawanna County and two are in Luzerne 
County. As part of its redesignation request, Pennsylvania referenced 
ozone monitoring data for the years 2004-2006 for the Scranton/Wilkes-
Barre Area. This data has been quality assured and is recorded in the 
AQS. The PADEP uses the AQS as the permanent database to maintain its 
data and quality assures the data transfers and content for accuracy. 
The fourth-high 8-hour daily maximum concentrations for the period from 
2004-2006, along with the three-year average, are summarized in Table 
2.

              Table 2.--Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area Fourth Highest 8-Hour Average Values (2004-2006)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Annual 4th highest reading (ppm)
                     Monitor/County/AIRS ID                      -----------------------------------------------
                                                                       2004            2005            2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wilson Fire Company Monitor, Lackawanna County, AQS ID 42-069-             0.071           0.080           0.071
 0101...........................................................
City of Scranton Monitor, Luzerne County AQS ID 42-069-2006.....           0.073           0.080           0.070
Nanticoke Monitor, Luzerne County AQS ID 42-079-1100............           0.068           0.074           0.064
Wilkes-Barre Monitor, Luzerne County AQS ID 42-079-1101.........           0.073           0.081           0.073
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Area design value for the 3-year period 2004-2006 is 0.075 ppm (based on Wilkes-Barre Monitor/AQS ID 42-079-
                                                      1101)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The air quality data for 2004-2006 show that the Scranton/Wilkes-
Barre Area has attained the standard with a design value of 0.075 ppm. 
The data collected at the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area monitors satisfies 
the Clean Air Act 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. The PADEP's request for redesignation for 
the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area indicates that the data is complete and 
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. In 
summary, EPA has determined that the data submitted by Pennsylvania and 
data taken from AQS indicate that the Area has attained the 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS.

B. The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements 
Under Section 110 and Part D of the Clean Air Act and Has a Fully 
Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) of the Clean Air Act

    EPA has determined that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area has met all

[[Page 54394]]

SIP requirements applicable for purposes of this redesignation under 
section 110 of the Clean Air Act (General SIP Requirements) and that it 
meets all applicable SIP requirements under Part D of Title I of the 
Clean Air Act, in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, 
EPA has determined that the SIP is fully approved with respect to all 
requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation in accordance 
with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these proposed determinations, 
EPA ascertained which requirements are applicable to the Scranton/
Wilkes-Barre Area and determined that the applicable portions of the 
SIP meeting these requirements are fully approved under section 110(k) 
of the Clean Air Act. 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 
Clean Air Act requirements that came due prior to the submittal of a 
complete redesignation request. See also, Michael Shapiro memorandum, 
September 17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66 (March 7, 1995) 
(redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor). Applicable requirements of the 
Clean Air Act 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 Clean Air Act. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 
(7th Cir. 2004). See also, 68 FR at 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) 
(redesignation of St. Louis).
    This section sets forth EPA's views on the potential effect of the 
Court's rulings on this proposed redesignation action. For the reasons 
set forth below, EPA does not believe that the Court's rulings alters 
any requirements relevant to this redesignation action so as to 
preclude redesignation, and do not prevent EPA from proposing or 
ultimately finalizing this redesignation. EPA believes that the Court's 
December 22, 2006 and June 8, 2007 decisions impose no impediment to 
moving forward with 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 Clean Air Act and 
longstanding policies regarding redesignation requests.
1. Section 110 General SIP Requirements
    Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the Clean Air Act delineates the 
general requirements for a SIP, which includes enforceable emissions 
limitations and other control measures, means, or techniques, 
provisions for the establishment and operation of appropriate devices 
necessary to collect data on ambient air quality, and programs to 
enforce the limitations. The general SIP elements and requirements set 
forth in section 110(a)(2) include, but are not limited to the 
following:
     Submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the State 
after reasonable public notice and hearing;
     Provisions for establishment and operation of appropriate 
procedures needed to monitor ambient air quality;
     Implementation of a source permit program; provisions for 
the implementation of part C requirements (Prevention of Significant 
Deterioration (PSD));
     Provisions for the implementation of Part D requirements 
for New Source Review (NSR) permit programs;
     Provisions for air pollution modeling; and
     Provisions for public and local agency participation in 
planning and emission control rule development.
    Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to 
prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air 
quality problems in another State. To implement this provision, EPA has 
required certain states to establish programs to address transport of 
air pollutants in accordance with the NOx SIP Call, October 27, 1998 
(63 FR 57356), amendments to the NOx SIP Call, May 14, 1999 (64 FR 
26298) and March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11222), and the Clean Air Interstate 
Rule (CAIR), May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162). However, the section 
110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a State are not linked with a particular 
nonattainment area's designation and classification in that State. EPA 
believes that the requirements linked with a particular nonattainment 
area's designation and classifications are the relevant measures to 
evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. The transport SIP 
submittal requirements, where applicable, continue to apply to a state 
regardless of the designation of any one particular area in the State. 
Thus, we do not believe that these requirements are 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area will still be subject 
to these requirements after it is redesignated. The section 110 and 
Part D requirements which are linked with a particular area's 
designation and classification are the relevant measures to evaluate in 
reviewing a redesignation request. This policy is consistent with EPA's 
existing policy on applicability of conformity (i.e., for 
redesignations) and oxygenated fuels requirement. See Reading, 
Pennsylvania, proposed and final rulemakings (61 FR 53174, October 10, 
1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7, 1997); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio final 
rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida, final 
rulemaking (60 FR 62748, December 7, 1995). See also, the discussion on 
this issue in the Cincinnati redesignation (65 FR at 37890, June 19, 
2000), and in the Pittsburgh redesignation (66 FR at 53099, October 19, 
2001). Similarly, with respect to the NOx SIP Call rules, EPA noted in 
its Phase 1 Final Rule to Implement the 8-hour Ozone NAAQS, that the 
NOx SIP Call rules are not ``an'' `applicable requirement' for purposes 
of section 110(1) because the NOx rules apply regardless of an area's 
attainment or nonattainment status for the 8-hour (or the 1-hour) 
NAAQS.'' 69 FR 23951, 23983 (April 30, 2004).
    EPA believes that section 110 elements not linked to the area's 
nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation. 
As we explain later in this notice, no Part D requirements applicable 
for purposes of redesignation under the 8-hour standard became due for 
the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area prior to submission of the redesignation 
request
 2. Part D Nonattainment Requirements Under the 8-Hour Standard
    Pursuant to an April 30, 2004, final rule (69 FR 23951), the 
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area was designated a basic nonattainment area 
under subpart 1 for the 8-hour ozone standard. Sections 172-176 of the 
Clean Air Act, found in subpart 1 of Part D, set forth the basic 
nonattainment requirements applicable to all nonattainment areas. 
Section 182 of the Clean Air Act, found in subpart 2 of Part D, 
establishes additional specific requirements depending on the area's 
nonattainment classification.

[[Page 54395]]

    With respect to the 8-hour standard, the court's ruling 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 of the area cannot now go forward. This belief is 
based upon (1) EPA's longstanding policy of evaluating redesignation 
requests 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 
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area was classified under subpart 1 and was 
obligated to meet only 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. See 68 FR 
25418, 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) (Redesignation of St. Louis).
    Moreover, it would be inequitable to retroactively apply any new 
SIP requirements that were not applicable at the time the request was 
submitted. The D.C. Circuit has recognized the inequity in such 
retroactive rulemaking, 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 8-hour subpart 2 requirements, if the Scranton/
Wilkes-Barre Area initially had been classified under subpart 2, the 
first two Part D subpart 2 requirements applicable to the Area under 
section 182(a) of the Clean Air Act would be: A base-year inventory 
requirement pursuant to section 182(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act, and, 
the emissions statement requirement pursuant to section 182(a)(3)(B).
    As stated previously, these requirements are not yet due for 
purposes of redesignation of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area, but 
nevertheless, Pennsylvania already has in its approved SIP, an 
emissions statement rule for the 1-hour standard that covers all 
portions of the designated 8-hour nonattainment area and, that 
satisfies the emissions statement requirement for the 8-hour standard. 
See, 25 Pa. Code 135.21(a)(1), codified at 40 CFR 52.2020; 60 FR 2881, 
January 12, 1995. With respect to the base-year inventory requirement, 
in this notice of proposed rulemaking, EPA is proposing to approve the 
2002 base-year inventory for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area, which was 
submitted on June 12, 2007, concurrently with its maintenance plan SIP 
revision. EPA is proposing to approve the 2002 base-year inventory as 
fulfilling the requirements of both section 182(a)(1) and section 
172(c)(3) of the Clean Air Act. A detailed evaluation of Pennsylvania's 
2002 base-year inventory for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area can be 
found in a Technical Support Document (TSD) prepared by EPA for this 
rulemaking. EPA has determined that the emission inventory and 
emissions statement requirements for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area 
have been satisfied.
    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 that the general conformity and NSR 
requirements do not require approval prior to redesignation.
    With respect to section 176, Conformity Requirements, section 
176(c) of the Clean Air Act 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 Clean Air Act required the EPA to 
promulgate. EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the conformity 
SIP requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating the 
redesignation request under section 107(d) since State conformity rules 
are still required after redesignation and Federal conformity rules 
apply where State rules have not been approved. See, Wall v. EPA, 265 
F. 3d 426, 438-440 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding this interpretation. See 
also, 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995).
    In the case of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area, EPA has also 
determined that before being redesignated, the 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.'' 
Normally, a State's Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) 
program will become effective in the area immediately upon 
redesignation to attainment. See the more detailed explanations in the 
following redesignation rulemakings: Detroit, MI (60 FR 12467-12468 
(March 7, 1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorrain, OH (61 FR 20458, 20469-70, 
May 7, 1996); Louisville, KY (66 FR 53665, 53669, October 23, 2001); 
Grand Rapids, MI (61 FR 31831, 31836-31837, June 21, 1996). In the case 
of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 Clean 
Air Act to ozone attainment areas within the Ozone Transport Region 
(OTR). The OTR NSR requirements are more

[[Page 54396]]

stringent than that required for a marginal or basic 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 
Area.
    EPA has also interpreted the section 184 OTR requirements, 
including the NSR program, as not being applicable for purposes of 
redesignation. The rationale for this is based on two considerations. 
First, the requirement to submit SIP revisions for the section 184 
requirements continues to apply to areas in the OTR after redesignation 
to attainment. Therefore, the State remains obligated to have NSR, as 
well as reasonably available control technology (RACT), and Vehicle 
Inspection and Maintenance programs even after redesignation. Second, 
the section 184 control measures are region-wide requirements and do 
not apply to the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area solely by virtue of the 
Area's designation and classification. See 61 FR 53174, 53175-53176 
(October 10, 1996) and 62 FR 24826, 24830-32 (May 7, 1997).
3. Part D Nonattainment Area Requirements Under the 1-Hour Standard
    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 the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 
Area must meet the federal 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 set 
forth in more detail below, the Area must also address four additional 
anti-backsliding provisions identified by the Court in its decisions.
    The anti-backsliding provisions at 40 CFR 51.905(a)(1) prescribe 1-
hour ozone NAAQS requirements that continue to apply after revocation 
of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS to former 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas. 
Section 51.905(a)(1)(i) provides that: ``The area remains subject to 
the obligation to adopt and implement the applicable requirements as 
defined in section 51.900(f), except as provided in paragraph 
(a)(1)(iii) of paragraph (b) of this section.''
    Section 51.900(f), as amended by 70 FR 30592, 30604 (May 26, 2005), 
states that:

    Applicable requirements means for an area the following 
requirements to the extent such requirements applied to the area for 
the area's classification under section 181(a)(1) of the Clean Air 
Act for the 1-hour NAAQS at the time of designation for the 8-hour 
NAAQS.
    (1) Reasonably available control technology (RACT).
    (2) Inspection and maintenance programs (I/M).
    (3) Major source applicability cut-offs for purposes of RACT.
    (4) Rate of Progress (ROP) reductions.
    (5) Stage II vapor recovery.
    (6) Clean fuels fleet program under section 183(c)(4) of the 
Clean Air Act.
    (7) Clean fuels for boilers under section 182(e)(3) of the Clean 
Air Act.
    (8) Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) during heavy traffic 
hours as required by section 182(e)(4) of the Clean Air Act.
    (9) Enhanced (ambient) monitoring under section 182(c)(1) of the 
Clean Air Act.
    (10) Transportation control measures (TCMs) under section 
182(c)(5) of the Clean Air Act.
    (11) Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) provisions of section 
182(d)(1) of the Clean Air Act.
    (12) NOX requirements under section 182(f) of the 
Clean Air Act.
    (13) Attainment demonstration or alternative as provided under 
section 51.905(a)(1)(ii).

    Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.905(c), the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area is 
subject to the obligations set forth in 51.905(a) and 51.900(f).
    Prior to its designation as an 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, the 
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area was designated a marginal nonattainment area 
for the 1-hour standard. With respect to the 1-hour standard, the 
applicable requirements under the anti-backsliding provisions at 40 CFR 
51.905(a)(1) for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area are limited to RACT and 
I/M programs specified in section 182(a) of the Clean Air Act and are 
discussed in the following paragraphs:
    Section 182(a)(2)(A) required SIP revisions to correct or amend 
RACT for sources in marginal areas, such as the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 
Area, that were subject to control technique guidelines (CTGs) issued 
before November 15, 1990 pursuant to Clean Air Act section 108. On 
December 22, 1994, EPA fully approved into the Pennsylvania SIP all 
corrections required under section 182(a)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act 
(59 FR 65971, December 22, 1994). EPA believes that this requirement 
applies only to marginal and higher classified areas under the 1-hour 
NAAQS pursuant to the 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act; therefore, 
this is a one-time requirement. After an area has fulfilled the section 
182(a)(2)(A) requirement for the 1-hour NAAQS, there is no requirement 
under the 8-hour NAAQS.
    Section 182(a)(2)(B) relates to the savings clause for vehicle 
inspection and maintenance (I/M). It requires marginal areas to adopt 
vehicle I/M programs. This provision was not applicable to the 
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area because this area did not have, and was not 
required to have, an I/M program before November 15, 1990.
    In addition the Court held that EPA should have retained four 
additional measures in its anti-backsliding provisions: (1) 
Nonattainment area NSR; (2) Section 185 penalty fees; (3) contingency 
measures under section 172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9) of the Clean Air Act; and 
(4) 1-hour motor vehicle emission budgets that were yet not replaced by 
8-hour emissions budgets. These requirements are addressed below:
    With respect to NSR, EPA has determined that areas being 
redesignated need not have an approved nonattainment New Source Review 
program, for the same reasons discussed previously with respect to the 
applicable Part D requirement for the 8-hour standard.
    The section 185 penalty fee requirement was not applicable in the 
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 1-hour marginal nonattainment area.
    With respect to the requirement for submission of contingency 
measures for the 1-hour standard, section 182(a) does not require 
contingency measures for marginal areas.
    The conformity portion of the Court's ruling does not impact the 
redesignation request for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area except to the 
extent that the Court in its June 8 decision clarified that for those 
areas with 1-hour MVEBs, anti-backsliding requires 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.
    Thus EPA has concluded that the area has met all requirements 
applicable for redesignation under the 1-hour standard.
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,

[[Page 54397]]

enhanced vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M), and Stage II vapor 
recovery or a comparable measure.
    In the case of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area, which is located in 
the OTR, nonattainment NSR will continue to be applicable after 
redesignation. On October 19, 2001, EPA approved the 1-hour NSR SIP 
revision for the Area. See 66 FR 53094 (October 19, 2001).
    EPA has also interpreted the section 184 OTR requirements, 
including NSR, as not being applicable for purposes of redesignation. 
Reading, PA Redesignation, 61 FR 53174, (October 10, 1996), 62 FR 24826 
(May 7, 1997). 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 Commonwealth 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, 53175-6 
(October 10, 1996) and 62 FR 24826, 24830-32 (May 7, 1997).
5. Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Has a Fully Approved SIP for Purposes of 
Redesignation
    EPA has fully approved the Pennsylvania SIP for the purposes of 
this redesignation. EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a 
redesignation request. Calcagni Memo, p. 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania 
Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F. 3d 984, 989-90 (6th Cir. 1998), Wall 
v. EPA, 265 F. 3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), plus any additional measures it 
may approve in conjunction with a redesignation action. See 68 FR at 
25425 (May 12, 2003) and citations therein.

C. The Air Quality Improvement in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 Summer Day (tpsd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Nonroad         Highway
              Year                    Point*           Area           mobile          mobile           Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002............................             4.6            36.0            36.6            19.0            96.2
2004............................             3.8            35.3            31.6            18.9            89.6
Difference (2002-04)............            -0.8            -0.7            -5.0            -0.1            -6.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Nitrogen Oxides (NOX)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002............................             8.4             3.8            74.4            11.3            97.9
2004............................             7.0             3.9            66.1            10.9            87.9
Difference (2002-04)............            -1.4            +0.1            -8.3            -0.4          -10.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The stationary point source emissions shown do not include banked emissions reduction credits (ERCs) for
  sources listed in Technical Appendix A-4 to Pennsylvania's SIP submission.
The banked ERCs include the following:
[cir] MACtac, Scranton Facility--0.20 tpsd VOC.
[cir] Proctor & Gamble, Hehoopany--1.70 tpsd VOC and 0.73 tpsd NOX.
[cir] TECHNEGLAS, Pittston--2.11 tpsd VOC and 0.09 tpsd NOX.
[cir] Thomson No. 1, Dunmore--0.15 tpsd VOC and 0.02 tpsd NOX.
[cir] Williams Generation, Hazelton Cogeneration--2.61 tpsd NOX.

    Between 2002 and 2004, VOC emissions decreased by 6.6 tpsd from 
96.2 tpsd to 89.6 tpsd. NOX emissions decreased over the 
same period by 10.0 tpsd from 97.9 tpsd to 87.9 tpsd. 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. These reductions, as 
well as anticipated future reductions, are due to the following 
permanent and enforceable measures.
1. Stationary Point Sources
Federal NOX SIP Call (66 FR 43795, August 21, 2001)
2. Stationary Area Sources
Solvent Cleaning (68 FR 2206, January 16, 2003)
Portable Fuel Containers (69 FR 70893, December 8, 2004)
3. Highway Vehicle Sources
Federal Motor Vehicle Control Programs (FMVCP)
--Tier 1 (56 FR 25724, June 5, 1991)
--Tier 2 (65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000)
--Heavy-duty Engine and Vehicle Standards (62 FR 54694, October 21, 
1997, and 65 FR 59896, October 6, 2000)
National Low Emission Vehicle (NLEV) Program (64 FR 72564, December 28, 
1999)
PA Vehicle Emission Inspection/Maintenance Program & Changes to Vehicle 
Safety Inspection Program in non-I/M Counties (70 FR 58313, October 6, 
2005)
4. Non-Road Sources
Non-road Diesel (69 FR 38958, June 29, 2004)

D. The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area Has a Fully Approvable Maintenance 
Plan Pursuant to Section 175A of the Clean Air Act

    In conjunction with its request to redesignate the Scranton/Wilkes-
Barre ozone nonattainment Area to attainment status, Pennsylvania 
submitted a SIP revision to provide for maintenance of the 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS in the Area for at least 11 years after redesignation. The 
Commonwealth is requesting that EPA approve this SIP revision as 
meeting the requirement of Clean Air

[[Page 54398]]

Act section 175A. Once approved, the maintenance plan for the 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS will ensure that the SIP for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area 
meets the requirements of the Clean Air Act regarding maintenance of 
the applicable 8-hour ozone standard.
What Is Required in a Maintenance Plan?
    Section 175 of the Clean Air Act sets forth the elements of a 
maintenance plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to 
attainment. Under section 175A, the plan must demonstrate continued 
attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years after approval 
of a redesignation of an area to attainment. Eight years after the 
redesignation, the Commonwealth must submit a revised maintenance plan 
demonstrating that attainment will continue to be maintained for the 10 
years following the initial 10-year period. To address the possibility 
of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must contain such 
contingency measures, with a schedule for implementation, as EPA deems 
necessary to assure prompt correction of any future 8-hour ozone 
violations. Section 175A of the Clean Air Act 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:
    (a) An attainment emissions inventory;
    (b) A maintenance demonstration;
    (c) A monitoring network;
    (d) Verification of continued attainment; and
    (e) A contingency plan.
Analysis of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area Maintenance Plan
    (a) Attainment inventory--An attainment inventory includes the 
emissions during the time period associated with the monitoring data 
showing attainment. PADEP determined that the appropriate attainment 
inventory year is 2004. That year establishes a reasonable year within 
the three-year block of 2004-2006 as a baseline and accounts for 
reductions attributable to implementation of the Clean Air Act 
requirements to date. The 2004 inventory is consistent with EPA 
guidance and is based on actual ``typical summer day'' emissions of VOC 
and NOX during 2004 and consists of a list of sources and 
their associated emissions.
    The 2002 and 2004 point source data was compiled from actual 
sources. Pennsylvania requires owners and operators of larger 
facilities to submit annual production figures and emission 
calculations each year. Throughput data are multiplied by emission 
factors from Factor Information Retrieval (FIRE) Data Systems and EPA's 
publication series AP-42, and are based on Source Classification Codes 
(SCC). The 2002 area source data was compiled using county-level 
activity data, from census numbers, from county numbers, etc. The 2004 
area source data was projected from the 2002 inventory using temporal 
allocations provided by the Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management 
Association (MARAMA).
    The on-road mobile source inventories for 2002 and 2004 were 
compiled using MOBILE6.2 and Pennsylvania Department of Transportation 
(PENNDOT) estimates for VMT. The PADEP has provided detailed data 
summaries to document the calculations of mobile on-road VOC and 
NOX emissions for 2002, as well as for the projection years 
of 2004, 2009, and 2018 (shown in Tables 5 and 6 below).
    The 2002 and 2004 emissions for the majority of non-road emission 
source categories were estimated using the EPA NONROAD 2005 model. The 
NONROAD model calculates emissions for diesel, gasoline, liquefied 
petroleum gasoline, and compressed natural gas-fueled non-road 
equipment types and includes growth factors. The NONROAD model does not 
estimate emissions from locomotives or aircraft. For 2002 and 2004 
locomotive emissions, the PADEP projected emissions from a 1999 survey 
using national fuel consumption information and EPA emission and 
conversion factors. Emissions from commercial aircraft for 2002 and 
2004 are estimated using EPA-approved Emissions & Dispersion Modeling 
System (EDMS) 4.20, the latest version available at the time the 
inventory was prepared. The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre International Airport 
(AVP) accounts for all commercial air traffic in the area. Small 
aircraft emissions were calculated using small airport statistics from 
the Federal Aviation Administration's APO Terminal Area Forecast Report 
and the Web site http://www.airnav.com.
    More detailed information on the compilation of the 2002, 2004, 
2009, and 2018 inventories can found in the Technical Appendices, which 
are part of the June 12, 2007 state submittal.
    (b) Maintenance Demonstration--On June 12, 2007, the PADEP 
submitted a maintenance plan as required by section 175A of the Clean 
Air Act. The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area maintenance plan shows 
maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS by demonstrating that current and 
future emissions of VOC and NOX remain at or below the 
attainment year 2004 emissions levels throughout the Area through the 
year 2018. A maintenance demonstration need not be based on modeling. 
See Wall v. EPA, supra; Sierra Club v. EPA, supra. See also, 66 FR at 
53099-53100; 68 FR at 25430-32.
    Tables 4 and 5 specify the VOC and NOX emissions for the 
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area for 2004, 2009, and 2018. The PADEP chose 
2009 as an interim year in the maintenance demonstration period to 
demonstrate that the VOC and NOX emissions are not projected 
to increase above the 2004 attainment level during the time of the 
maintenance period.

                               Table 4.--Total VOC Emissions for 2004-2018 (tpsd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Source category                               2004            2009            2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................................................             3.8             4.6             5.9
Area............................................................            35.3            33.7            36.3
Highway Mobile..................................................            31.6             2.2            16.9
Nonroad Mobile..................................................            18.9            16.5            13.2
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................            89.6            80.0            72.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 54399]]


                               Table 5.--Total NOX Emissions for 2004-2018 (tpsd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Source category                               2004            2009            2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................................................             7.0             9.3            10.4
Area............................................................             3.9             4.1             4.4
Highway Mobile..................................................            66.1            48.3            23.7
Nonroad Mobile..................................................            10.9             8.9             5.6
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................            87.9            70.6            44.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the following programs are either effective or due to 
become effective and will further contribute to the maintenance 
demonstration of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS:
     The Clean Air Interstate Rule (71 FR 25328, April 28, 
2006).
     The Federal NOX SIP Call (66 FR 43795, August 
21, 2001).
     Portable Fuel Containers Rule (69 FR 70893, December 8, 
2004).
     Consumer Products Rule (69 FR 70895, December 8, 2004).
     Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings 
(69 FR 68080, November 23, 2004).
     Federal Light-duty Highway Vehicle Control Program 
(FMVCP)--Tier 1/Tier 2 Emissions Standards (Model Year 1994/2004); 
(Tier 1--56 FR 25724, June 5, 1991); (Tier 2--65 FR 6698, February 10, 
2000).
     Federal Heavy-duty Diesel Highway Engine Standards (Model 
Year 2004/2007)/Low-Sulfur Highway Diesel Fuel Standards (2006); (66 FR 
5002, January 18, 2001).
     Federal Nonroad Engine Emission Standards (Model Year 
2008) and Nonroad Diesel Fuel 2007); (69 FR 38958, June 29, 2004).
     NLEV/PA Clean Vehicle Program (54 FR 72564, December 28, 
1999).
     PA Vehicle Emission Inspection and Maintenance Program and 
Changes to Vehicle Safety Inspection Program for Non-I/M Counties (70 
FR 58313, October 6, 2005).
    Based on 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area.
    (c) Monitoring Network--There are four ozone monitors (located in 
Lackawanna and Luzerne Counties) that were used to support the 
Commonwealth's ozone maintenance plan for the Scranton/Wilkes/Barre 
area. The Commonwealth has committed to continue to operate its 
monitoring network in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, with no reduction 
in the number of sites.
    (d) Verification of Continued Attainment--In addition to 
maintaining the key elements of its regulatory program, the 
Commonwealth will track the attainment status of the ozone NAAQS in the 
Area by reviewing air quality and emissions data during the maintenance 
period. The Commonwealth will perform an annual evaluation of Vehicle 
Miles Traveled (VMT) data and emissions reported from stationary 
sources, and compare them to the assumptions about these factors used 
in the maintenance plan. The Commonwealth will also evaluate the 
periodic (every three years) emission inventories prepared under EPA's 
Consolidated Emission Reporting Regulation (40 CFR 51, subpart A) to 
see if they exceed the attainment year inventory (2004) by more than 10 
percent. The PADEP will also continue to operate the existing ozone 
monitoring station in the Area pursuant to 40 CFR part 58 throughout 
the maintenance period and submit quality-assured ozone data to EPA 
through the AQS system. Section 175A(b) of the Clean Air Act states 
that eight years following redesignation of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 
Area, PADEP will be required to submit a second maintenance plan that 
will ensure attainment through 2028. PADEP has made that commitment to 
meet the requirement section 175A(b).
    (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 Clean Air 
Act requires that a maintenance plan include such contingency measures 
as EPA deems necessary to ensure that the Commonwealth 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area to stay in compliance 
with the 8-hour ozone standard after redesignation depends upon VOC and 
NOX emissions in the Area remaining at or below 2004 levels. 
The Commonwealth's maintenance plan projects VOC and NOX 
emissions to decrease and stay below 2004 levels through the year 2018. 
The Commonwealth's maintenance plan outlines the procedures for the 
adoption and implementation of contingency measures to further reduce 
emissions should a violation occur.
    Contingency measures will be considered if for two consecutive 
years the fourth highest 8-hour ozone concentration at any Scranton/
Wilkes-Barre Area monitor is above 84 ppb. If this trigger point 
occurs, the Commonwealth will evaluate whether additional local 
emission control measures should be implemented in order to prevent a 
violation of the air quality standard. PADEP will also analyze the 
conditions leading to the excessive ozone levels and evaluate which 
measures might be most effective in correcting the excessive ozone 
levels. PADEP will also analyze the potential emissions effect of 
Federal, state and local measures that have been adopted but not yet 
implemented at the time the excessive ozone levels occurred. PADEP will 
then begin the process of implementing any selected measures.
    Contingency measures will also be considered in the event that a 
violation of the 8-hour ozone standard occurs at any Scranton/Wilkes-
Barre Area monitor. In the event of a violation of the 8-hour ozone 
standard, PADEP will adopt additional emissions reduction measures as 
expeditiously as practicable in accordance with the implementation 
schedule listed later in this notice and in the Pennsylvania Air 
Pollution Control Act in order to return the Area to attainment with 
the standard. Contingency measures to be considered for the Scranton/
Wilkes-Barre Area will include, but not be limited to the following:
    Regulatory measures:

--Additional controls on consumer products.

[[Page 54400]]

--Additional controls on portable fuel containers.
    Non-Regulatory measures:

--Voluntary diesel engine ``chip reflash'' (installation software to 
correct the defeat device option on certain heavy-duty diesel engines).
--Diesel retrofits, including replacement, repowering or alternative 
fuel use, for public or private local on-road or off-road fleets.
--Idling reduction technology for Class 2 yard locomotives.
--Idling reduction technologies or strategies for truck stops, 
warehouses and other freight handling facilities.
--Accelerated turnover of lawn and garden equipment, especially 
commercial equipment, including promotion of electric equipment.
--Additional promotion of alternative fuel (e.g., biodiesel) for home 
heating and agricultural use.

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

VII. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and Identified 
in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Maintenance Plan Adequate and Approvable?

A. What Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets?

    Under the Clean Air Act, States are required to submit, at various 
times, control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans in ozone areas. 
These control strategy SIPs (i.e., reasonable further progress SIPs and 
attainment demonstration SIPs) and maintenance plans identify and 
establish MVEBs for certain criteria pollutants and/or their precursors 
to address pollution from on-road mobile sources. In the maintenance 
plan, the MVEBs are termed ``on-road mobile source emission budgets.'' 
Pursuant to 40 CFR part 93 and 51.112, MVEBs must be established in an 
ozone maintenance plan. An MVEB is the portion of the total allowable 
emissions that is allocated to highway and transit vehicle use and 
emissions. An 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 Clean Air Act, new transportation 
projects, such as the construction of new highways, must ``conform'' to 
(i.e., be consistent with) the part of a State's air quality plan that 
addresses pollution from cars and trucks. ``Conformity'' to the SIP 
means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality 
violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of 
or reasonable progress towards the NAAQS. If a transportation plan does 
not ``conform,'' most new projects that would expand the capacity of 
roadways cannot go forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth EPA 
policy, criteria, and procedures for demonstrating and ensuring 
conformity of such transportation activities to a SIP.
    When reviewing submitted ``control strategy'' SIPs or maintenance 
plans containing MVEBs, EPA must affirmatively find the MVEB contained 
therein ``adequate'' for use in determining transportation conformity. 
After EPA affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB is adequate for 
transportation conformity purposes, the 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 
Clean Air Act. EPA's substantive criteria for determining ``adequacy'' 
of a MVEB are set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4).
    EPA's process for determining ``adequacy'' consists of three basic 
steps: public notification of a SIP submission, a public comment 
period, and EPA's adequacy finding. This process for determining the 
adequacy of submitted SIP MVEBs was initially outlined in EPA's May 14, 
1999 guidance, ``Conformity Guidance on Implementation of March 2, 
1999, Conformity Court Decision.'' This guidance was finalized in the 
Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for the ``New 8-Hour Ozone 
and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Miscellaneous 
Revisions for Existing Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule 
Amendments--Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Change'' on 
July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). EPA consults this guidance and follows this 
rulemaking in making its adequacy determinations.
    The MVEBS for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area are listed in Table 1 
for 2009 and 2018. Table 1 presents the projected emissions for the on-
road mobile sources plus any portion of the safety margin allocated to 
the MVEBs (safety margin allocation for 2009 and 2018 only). 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area. The total emissions from point, area, on-
road mobile, and nonroad mobile sources in 2004 equaled 89.6 tpsd of 
VOC and 87.9 tpsd of NOX. The PADEP projects total emissions 
for the year 2018 to be 72.3 tpsd of VOC and 44.1 tpsd of 
NOX from all sources in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre area. The 
safety margin for 2018 would be the difference between these amounts, 
or 17.3 tpsd of VOC and 43.8 tpsd 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.--Safety Margins for Scranton/Wilkes-Barre (2009 & 2018)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          VOC  emissions  NOX  emissions
             Inventory year                    (tpsd)          (tpsd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004 Attainment.........................            89.6            87.9
2009 Interim............................            80.0            70.6

[[Page 54401]]


2009 Safety Margin......................             9.6            17.3
2004 Attainment.........................            89.6            87.9
2018 Final..............................            72.3            44.1
2018 Safety Margin......................            17.3            43.8
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The PADEP allocated 1.85 tpsd VOC and 1.4 tpsd NOX of 
the 2009 safety margin 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 2.6 tpsd VOC and 
2.1 tpsd 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area MVEBs.

Table 7.--Final Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
                           Area* (2009 & 2018)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          VOC  emissions  NOX  emissions
             Inventory year                    (tpsd)          (tpsd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009 Projected On road Emissions........            23.3            46.9
2009 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs...            1.85            1.40
2009 MVEBs..............................            25.2            48.3
2018 Projected On road Emissions........            14.3            21.6
2018 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs...             2.6             2.1
2018 MVEBs..............................            16.9            23.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*PA DEP calculates MVEBS using kilograms per summer day, and also lists
  the values in tons per summer day, rounded to 3 significant digits.
  This appears to make the totals in the table incorrect, but is merely
  the result of the rounded tpsd values.

C. Why Are the MVEBs Approvable?

    The 2009 and 2018 MVEBs for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area are 
approvable because the MVEBs for VOCs and NOX 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 MVEBs in the 
Maintenance Plan?

    The MVEBs for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area maintenance plan are 
being posted to EPA's conformity Web site concurrently with this 
proposal. The public comment period will end at the same time as the 
public comment period for this proposed rule. In this case, EPA is 
concurrently processing the Clean Air 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 EPA is 
proposing to approve the MVEBs as part of the maintenance plan. The 
MVEBs cannot be used for transportation conformity until the 
maintenance plan and associated MVEBs are approved in a final Federal 
Register notice, or EPA otherwise finds the budgets adequate in a 
separate action following the comment period.
    If EPA receives adverse written comments with respect to the 
proposed approval of the Area's 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 Scranton/
Wilkes-Barre Area MVEBs will also be announced on EPA's conformity Web 
site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/index.htm (from 
there, click on ``Adequacy Review of SIP Submissions'').

VIII. Proposed Actions

    EPA is proposing to determine that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area 
has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve 
the redesignation of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area from nonattainment 
to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA has evaluated 
Pennsylvania's redesignation request and determined that it meets the 
redesignation criteria set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean 
Air Act. 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area from nonattainment to 
attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. EPA is also proposing to 
approve the associated maintenance plan for the Area, submitted on June 
12, 2007, as a revision to the Pennsylvania SIP. EPA is proposing to 
approve the maintenance plan for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area because 
it meets the requirements of section 175A as described previously in 
this notice. EPA is also proposing to approve the 2002 base-year 
inventory for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area, and the MVEBs submitted 
by Pennsylvania for the 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 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)). 
This action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal

[[Page 54402]]

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. 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 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 (Pub. L. 104-4). Because this 
action affects the status of a geographical area or allows the state to 
avoid adopting or implementing other requirements and because this 
action does not impose any new requirements on sources, this proposed 
rule also does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more 
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and 
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities 
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by 
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it have 
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between 
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as 
specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), 
because it merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a 
Federal requirement, and does not alter the relationship or the 
distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air 
Act. This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it approves a state rule 
implementing a Federal standard.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Redesignation is an 
action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not 
impose any new requirements on sources. Thus, the requirements of 
section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act 
of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required by section 3 of 
Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing this 
proposed rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting 
errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a 
clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied with 
Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the 
takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney 
General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and 
Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the executive order. 
This rule, proposing to approve the redesignation of the Scranton/
Wilkes-Barre 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.

    Dated: September 14, 2007.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
 [FR Doc. E7-18844 Filed 9-24-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
