  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0624; FRL-     ] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Redesignation of the Clearfield/Indiana 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) revisions submitted by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania.  The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
(PADEP) is requesting that the Clearfield and Indiana Counties ozone
nonattainment area (Clearfield/Indiana Area) be redesignated as
attainment for the 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard
(NAAQS).  EPA is proposing to approve the ozone redesignation request
for the Clearfield/Indiana Area.  In conjunction with its redesignation
request, PADEP submitted a SIP revision consisting of a maintenance plan
for the Clearfield/Indiana 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 Clearfield/Indiana
Area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, based upon three years of
complete quality-assured ambient air quality ozone monitoring data for
2004-2006.  EPA’s proposed approval of the 8-hour ozone redesignation
request is based on its determination that the Clearfield/Indiana Area
has met the criteria for redesignation to attainment specified in the
Clean Air Act (CAA).  In addition, PADEP submitted a 2002 base-year
inventory for the Clearfield/Indiana Area which EPA is proposing to
approve as a SIP revision.  EPA is also providing information on the
status of its adequacy determination for the motor vehicle emission
budgets (MVEBs) that are identified in the Clearfield/Indiana Area
maintenance plan for purposes of transportation conformity, which EPA is
also proposing to approve.  EPA is proposing approval of the
redesignation request, the maintenance plan, the 2002 base-year
inventory, and the MVEBs SIP revisions in accordance with the
requirements of the CAA.

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

ADDRESSES:  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number
EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0624 by one of the following methods:

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

B.	E-mail:    HYPERLINK "mailto:powers.marilyn@epa.gov" 
fernandez.cristina@epa.gov .

Mail:  EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0624, Cristina Fernandez, Branch Chief, Air
Quality Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.

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

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

Instructions:  Direct your comments to Docket ID No.
EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0624.  EPA's policy is that all comments received will
be included in the public docket without change, and may be made
available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to
be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or
e-mail.  The www.regulations.gov website is an (anonymous access(
system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.  If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet.  If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit.  If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment.  Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.

Docket:  All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.  Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form.  Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.  Copies of the State submittal
are available at Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection,
Bureau of Air Quality Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market Street,
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory Becoat, (215) 814-2036, or by
e-mail at becoat.gregory@epa.gov.

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

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I.   	What Are the Actions EPA Is Proposing to Take?

II.   	What is the Background for These Proposed Actions?

III.  	What are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?

IV.  	Why is EPA Taking These Actions?

V.  	What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?

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

VII.  	Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and
Identified in the Maintenance Plan for the Clearfield/Indiana Area
Adequate and Approvable?

VIII.  	Proposed Action



Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I.  What Are the Actions EPA Is Proposing to Take?

On June 14, 2007, PADEP formally submitted a request to redesignate the
Clearfield/Indiana Area from nonattainment to attainment of the 8-hour
NAAQS for ozone.  Concurrently, PADEP submitted a maintenance plan for
the Clearfield/Indiana Area as a SIP revision to ensure continued
attainment for at least 10 years after redesignation.  PADEP also
submitted a 2002 base-year inventory as a SIP revision.  On May 23,
2008, PADEP formally submitted a revision to the June 14, 2007 submittal
encompassing two changes.  First, PADEP submitted a new methodology that
projects future emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) from electric
generating units (EGUs) to replace the former methodology submitted on
June 14, 2007.  Second, PADEP separated the MVEBs for the
Clearfield/Indiana Area into separate MVEBs for Clearfield County and
Indiana County, to replace the MVEBs established in the June 14, 2007
submittal.

The Clearfield/Indiana Area was designated a subpart 1 or a basic 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area in a final rule published on April 30, 2004 (69
FR 23858), based upon its exceedance of the 8-hour health-based standard
for ozone during the years 2001-2003.  EPA is proposing to determine
that the Clearfield/Indiana 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
Clearfield/Indiana Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.  EPA is also proposing to approve the Clearfield/Indiana
Area maintenance plan as a SIP revision.  The maintenance plan is
designed to ensure continued attainment in the Clearfield/Indiana Area
for the next ten years.  EPA is also proposing to approve the 2002
base-year inventory for the Clearfield/Indiana Area as a SIP revision. 
Additionally, EPA is announcing its action on the adequacy process for
the MVEBs identified in the Clearfield/Indiana Area maintenance plan,
and proposing to approve the MVEBs identified for volatile organic
compounds (VOC) and NOx for transportation conformity purposes.		

II.  What is the Background for These Proposed Actions?

A.  General

Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources.  Rather,
emissions of NOx and VOC react in the presence of sunlight to form
ground-level ozone.  The air pollutants NOx and VOC are referred to as
precursors of ozone.  The CAA establishes a process for air quality
management through the attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS.

On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone standard of
0.08 parts per million (ppm).  This standard is more stringent than the
previous 1-hour ozone standard.  EPA designated, as nonattainment, any
area violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the air quality data for
the three years of 2001-2003.  These were the most recent three years of
data at the time EPA designated 8-hour areas.  The Clearfield/Indiana
Area was designated as basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment status in a
Federal Register notice published on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23858), 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 Clearfield/Indiana Area (as well as
most other areas of the country) effective June 15, 2005.  See, 40 CFR
50.9(b); 69 FR at 23966 (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).  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
CAA 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 CAA, 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.  

The Court upheld EPA’s authority to revoke the 1-hour standard
provided there were adequate anti-backsliding provisions.  EPA discusses
its rationale why the decision in South Coast is not an impediment to
redesignating the Clearfield/Indiana Area to attainment of the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS elsewhere in this document. 

The CAA, Title I, Part D, contains two sets of provisions – subpart 1
and subpart 2– that address planning and control requirements for
nonattainment areas.  Subpart 1 (which EPA refers to as “basic”
nonattainment) contains general, less prescriptive requirements for
nonattainment areas for any pollutant – including ozone – governed
by a NAAQS.  Subpart 2 (which EPA refers to as “classified”
nonattainment) provides more specific requirements for ozone
nonattainment areas.      In 2004, Clearfield/Indiana Area was
designated a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment area based upon air
quality monitoring data from 2001-2003, and therefore, is subject to the
requirements of subpart 1 of Part D.

Under 40 CFR part 50, the 8-hour ozone standard is attained when the
3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average
ambient air quality ozone concentrations is less than or equal to 0.08
ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when rounding is considered).  See 69 FR 23858,
(April 30, 2004) for further information.  Ambient air quality
monitoring data for the 3-year period must meet data completeness
requirements.  The data completeness requirements are met when the
average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring data is greater
than 90 percent, and no single year has less than 75 percent data
completeness as determined in Appendix I of 40 CFR part 50.  The ozone
monitoring data from the 3-year period of 2004-2006 indicates that the
Clearfield/Indiana Area has a design value of 0.077 ppm.  Therefore, the
ambient ozone data for the Clearfield/Indiana Area indicates no
violations of the 8-hour ozone standard.

B.  The Clearfield/Indiana Area

The Clearfield/Indiana Area consists of Clearfield and Indiana Counties
in Pennsylvania.  Prior to its designation as an 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area, the Clearfield/Indiana Area was an
attainment/unclassifiable area for the 1-hour ozone nonattainment NAAQS.
 See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991). 

On June 14, 2007, PADEP requested that the Clearfield/Indiana Area be
redesignated to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard.  The
redesignation request included 3 years of complete, quality-assured data
for the period of 2004-2006, indicating that the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone
had been achieved in the Clearfield/Indiana Area.  The data satisfies
the CAA requirements when the 3-year average of the annual
fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration
(commonly referred to as the area’s design value) is less than or
equal to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when rounding is considered).  Under
the CAA, a nonattainment area may be redesignated if sufficient
complete, quality-assured data is available to determine that the area
has attained the standard and the area meets the other CAA redesignation
requirements set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E).

III.  What are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?

The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment area
to attainment.  Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, allows
for redesignation, providing that:

(1) EPA determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS; 

(2) EPA has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for the
area under section 110(k); (3) EPA determines that the improvement in
air quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions
resulting from implementation of the applicable SIP and applicable
Federal air pollutant control regulations and other permanent and
enforceable reductions; 

(4) EPA has fully approved a maintenance plan for the area as meeting
the requirements of section 175A; and

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“Technical Support Documents (TSDs) for Redesignation Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,” Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief,
Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17, 1993; 		

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

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

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

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

IV.  Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?

On June 14, 2007, PADEP requested redesignation of the
Clearfield/Indiana Area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. 
Simultaneously, PADEP submitted a maintenance plan for the
Clearfield/Indiana Area as a SIP revision to ensure continued attainment
at least 10 years after redesignation.  PADEP also submitted a 2002
base-year inventory as a SIP revision.  On May 23, 2008, PADEP formally
submitted a SIP revision encompassing two changes.  First, PADEP
submitted a new methodology that projects future emissions of NOx from
EGUs to replace the former methodology submitted on June 14, 2007. 
Second, PADEP separated the MVEBs for the Clearfield/Indiana Area into
separate MVEBs for Clearfield County and Indiana County, to replace the
MVEBs established in the June 14, 2007 submittal.  EPA has determined
that the Clearfield/Indiana 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 designation of
the Clearfield/Indiana 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
Clearfield/Indiana Area for the next 10 years.  The maintenance plan
includes contingency measures to remedy any future violations of the
8-hour NAAQS (should they occur), and identifies the MVEBs for NOx and
VOC for transportation conformity purposes for the years 2009 and 2018. 


Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) and the Pennsylvania
Department of Transportation (PennDOT), in conjunction with state Rural
Planning Organizations (RPOs), are responsible for making timely
transportation conformity determinations.  The Clearfield/Indiana Area
contains one MPO and one RPO.  The MPO is the Southwestern Pennsylvania
Commission for Indiana County, and the RPO is the North Central PA
Regional Planning and Development Commission for Clearfield County. 
Pennsylvania has established separate motor vehicle emission budgets for
each MPO/RPO for their respective portion of the Clearfield/Indiana
Area.  EPA’s transportation conformity regulations (40 CFR part
93.124(d)) allow a SIP to establish motor vehicle budgets for each
MPO/RPO if a nonattainment area includes more than one MPO/RPO.

These motor vehicle emissions budgets displayed in the following table
reflect the changes made in the May 23, 2008 SIP revision:

Table 1a:  Clearfield/Indiana Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets 

North Central Pennsylvania Regional Planning and Development Commission
RPO (Clearfield County portion of the Area), in Tons per Summer Day
(tpd)

Year	VOC	NOx

2009 	4.11	11.44

2018	2.71	5.14



Table 1b:  Clearfield/Indiana Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission MPO (Indiana County portion of the
Area), in Tons per Summer Day (tpd)

Year	VOC	NOx

2009 	3.06	4.85

2018	1.92	2.40



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

EPA is proposing to determine that the Clearfield/Indiana Area has
attained the 8-hour ozone standard, and that all other redesignation
criteria have been met.  The following is a description of how PADEP’s
June 14, 2007 and May 23, 2008 submittals satisfy the requirements of
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.

A.  The Clearfield/Indiana Area Has Attained the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS

EPA is proposing to determine that the Clearfield/Indiana Area has
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.  For ozone, an area attains the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS if there are no violations based on three complete and
consecutive calendar years of quality-assured air quality monitoring
data, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.10 and Appendix I of
part 50.  To attain this standard, the design value, which is the three
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 Clearfield/Indiana Area, there are two ozone monitors, one in
Clearfield County (AQS# 42-033-4000) and another in Indiana County (AQS
# 42-063-004).  At the time of the June 14, 2007 submittal, the Indiana
County monitor, had only two years, 2005 and 2006, of quality assured
data available.  Since the standard requires an average concentration of
three years, the air quality status of the Indiana County monitoring
site could not be determined using only two years, 2005 and 2006, of
ambient data.  As part of its redesignation request, Pennsylvania
submitted the ozone monitoring data for the Clearfield County monitor
for the years 2004-2006 (the most recent three years of data available
as of the time of the redesignation request) for the Clearfield/Indiana
Area.  This data has been quality assured and is recorded in AQS.  PADEP
uses AQS as the permanent database to maintain its quality assured data.
 The fourth-highest 8-hour daily maximum concentrations, along with the
three-year average, are summarized in Table 2 for the monitor that has
three complete and consecutive calendar years of quality-assured air
quality monitoring data.

Table 2: Clearfield/Indiana Area Fourth Highest 8-hour Average Values;
Clearfield County Monitor, AQS ID 42-033-4000                           
                 

Year	Annual 4th High Reading (ppm)

2004	0.074

2005	0.086

2006	0.072

The average for the 3-year period 2004 through 2006 is 0.077 ppm



The air quality data for 2004-2006 show that the Clearfield/Indiana Area
has attained the standard with a design value of 0.077 ppm.  The data
collected at the Clearfield/Indiana Area monitor satisfies the CAA
requirement that the three-year average of the annual fourth-highest
daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration is less than or equal
to 0.08 ppm.  PADEP’s request for redesignation for the
Clearfield/Indiana Area indicates that the data was quality assured in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58.  In addition, 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 confirmed from AQS indicates that the
Clearfield/Indiana Area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

	

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

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

The September 4, 1992 Calcagni memorandum (“Procedures for Processing
Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,” Memorandum from John
Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, September 4, 1992)
describes EPA’s interpretation of section 107(d)(3)(E) with respect to
the timing of applicable requirements.  Under this interpretation, to
qualify for redesignation, States requesting redesignation to attainment
must meet only the relevant CAA requirements that come due prior to the
submittal of a complete redesignation request.  See also, Michael
Shapiro memorandum, September 17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66,
(March 7, 1995) (redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor).  Applicable
requirements of the CAA that come due subsequent to the area’s
submittal of a complete redesignation request remain applicable until a
redesignation is approved, but are not required as a prerequisite to
redesignation.  Section 175A(c) of the CAA.  Sierra Club v. EPA, 375
F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004).  See also, 68 FR 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003)
(redesignation of St. Louis).

This section also sets forth EPA’s views on the potential effect of
the Court’s rulings on this proposed redesignation action.  For the
reasons set forth below, 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 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 CAA and longstanding policies regarding redesignation requests.

1.  Section 110 General SIP Requirements

Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the CAA delineates the general
requirements for a SIP, which include enforceable emissions limitations
and other control measures, means, or techniques, provisions for the
establishment and operation of appropriate devices necessary to collect
data on ambient air quality, and programs to enforce the limitations. 
The general SIP elements and requirements set forth in section 110(a)(2)
includes, but are not limited to, the following:

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

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

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

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

Provisions for air pollution modeling; and 

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

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

     

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

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

2.  Part D Nonattainment Area Requirements Under the 1-Hour and 8-Hour
Standards

The Clearfield/Indiana Area was designated a basic nonattainment area
for the 8-hour ozone standard.  Sections 172-176 of the CAA, found in
subpart 1 of Part D, set forth the basic nonattainment requirements for
all nonattainment areas.  As discussed previously, because the
Clearfield/Indiana Area was designated unclassifiable/attainment under
the 1-hour standard, and was never designated nonattainment for the
1-hour standard, there are no outstanding 1-hour nonattainment area
requirements it would be required to meet.  Thus, we find that the
Court’s ruling does not result in any additional 1-hour requirements
for purposes of redesignation.

With respect to the 8-hour standard, EPA notes that 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 requirements in
accordance with the requirements due at the time the request is
submitted; and (2) consideration of the inequity of applying
retroactively any requirements that might in the future be applied.

At the time the redesignation request was submitted, the
Clearfield/Indiana Area was classified under subpart 1 and was obligated
to meet subpart 1 requirements.  Under EPA’s longstanding
interpretation of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, to qualify for
redesignation, states

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

Moreover, it would be inequitable to retroactively apply any new SIP
requirements that were not applicable at the time the request was
submitted.  The D.C. Circuit recognized the inequity in such retroactive
rulemaking.  See, Sierra Club v. Whitman, 285 F. 3d 63 (D.C. Cir. 2002),
in which the D.C. Circuit upheld a District Court’s ruling refusing to
make retroactive an EPA determination of nonattainment that was past the
statutory due date.  Such a determination would have resulted in the
imposition of additional requirements on the area.  The Court stated: 
“Although EPA failed to make the nonattainment determination within
the statutory time frame, Sierra Club’s proposed solution only makes
the situation worse.  Retroactive relief would likely impose large costs
on the States, which would face fines and suits for not implementing air
pollution prevention plan 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 the 8-hour standard, EPA proposes to determine that
Pennsylvania’s SIP meets all applicable SIP requirements under Part D
of the CAA, because no 8-hour ozone standard Part D requirements
applicable for purposes of redesignation became due prior to submission
of the redesignation request for the Clearfield/Indiana Area.  Because
the Commonwealth submitted a complete redesignation request for the
Clearfield/Indiana Area prior to the deadline for any submissions
required under the 8-hour standard, we have determined that the Part D
requirements do not apply to the Clearfield/Indiana Area for the
purposes of redesignation.

In addition to the fact that no Part D requirements applicable under the
8-hour standard became due prior to submission of the redesignation
request, EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the general
conformity and NSR requirements of Part D as not requiring approval
prior to redesignation.

With respect to section 176, Conformity Requirements, section 176(c) of
the CAA requires States to establish criteria and procedures to ensure
that Federally supported or funded projects conform to the air quality
planning goals in the applicable SIP.  The requirement to determine
conformity applies to transportation plans, programs, and projects
developed, funded or approved under Title 23 U.S.C. and the Federal
Transit Act (“transportation conformity”) as well as to all other
Federally supported or funded projects (“general conformity”). 
State conformity revisions must be consistent with Federal conformity
regulations relating to consultation, enforcement and enforceability
that the CAA required 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 Clearfield/Indiana Area, EPA has also determined that
before being redesignated, the Clearfield/Indiana Area need not comply
with the requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to
redesignation.  Additionally, Pennsylvania’s preconstruction
permitting program regulations in Chapter 127.200-217 of the
Pennsylvania Code (approved into the SIP at 40 CFR 52.2020(c)), apply
only to ozone nonattainment area sources that are located in areas
classified as marginal or worse, i.e., to subpart 2 nonattainment areas.
 Pennsylvania’s NSR regulations do not apply to sources in
nonattainment areas classified as basic nonattainment under subpart 1. 
Consequently, sources in the Clearfield/Indiana Area are subject to Part
D NSR requirements of Appendix S to 40 CFR part 51, pursuant to 40 CFR
52.24(k).  Appendix S of 40 CFR part 51 contains the preconstruction
permitting program that applies to major stationary sources in
nonattainment areas lacking an approved Part D NSR program.  Appendix S
applies during the interim period after EPA designates an area as
nonattainment, but before EPA approves revisions to a SIP to implement
the Part D NSR requirements for that pollutant.  See, 70 FR 71618
(November 29, 2005).  The Chapter 127 Part D NSR regulations in the
Pennsylvania SIP explicitly apply to attainment areas within the Ozone
Transport Region (OTR).  See, Chapter 127 in 40 CFR 52.2020(c)(1);  See,
66 FR 53094, October 19, 2001.  Therefore, after the Clearfield/Indiana
Area is redesignated to attainment, sources in the Clearfield/Indiana
Area will be subject to Part D NSR applicable under the permitting
regulations in Chapter 127, because the Clearfield/Indiana Area is
located in the OTR. 

All areas in the 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
reasonably available control technology (RACT), NSR, enhanced vehicle
inspection and maintenance (I/M), and Stage II vapor recovery or a
comparable measure.

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 RACT, even after redesignation.  Second, the section 184 control
measures are region-wide requirements and do not apply to the
Clearfield/Indiana Area by virtue of the area’s designation and
classification, and thus are properly considered not relevant to an
action changing an area’s designation.  See, 61 FR 53174, 53175-53176
(October 10, 1996) and 62 FR 24826, 24830-24832 (May 7, 1997).

In the case of Clearfield/Indiana Area, which is located in the OTR,
nonattainment NSR will continue to be applicable after redesignation. 
On October 19, 2001 (66 FR 53094), EPA fully approved the 1-hour
Pennsylvania’s NSR SIP revision consisting of Pennsylvania’s Chapter
127 Part D NSR regulations that cover the Clearfield/Indiana Area.  The
Chapter 127 Part D NSR regulations in the Pennsylvania SIP explicitly
apply the requirements for NSR of section 184 of the CAA to attainment
areas within the OTR.

3.  The Clearfield/Indiana Area Has a Fully Approved SIP for the
Purposes of Redesignation

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

The Clearfield/Indiana Area was a 1-hour attainment/unclassifiable area
at the time of its designation as a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment
area on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857).  Because the Clearfield/Indiana
Area was a 1-hour attainment/unclassifiable area, there are no previous
Part D SIP submittal requirements.  Also, no Part D submittal
requirements have come due prior to the submittal of the 8-hour
maintenance plan for the area.  Therefore, all Part D submittal
requirements have been fulfilled.  Because there are no outstanding SIP
submission requirements applicable for the purposes of redesignation of
the Clearfield/Indiana Area, the applicable implementation plan
satisfies all pertinent SIP requirements.  As indicated previously, EPA
believes that the section 110 elements not connected with Part D
nonattainment plan submissions and not linked to the area’s
nonattainment status are not applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation.  EPA also believes that no 8-hour Part D requirements
applicable for purposes of redesignation have yet become due for the
Clearfield/Indiana Area, and therefore they need not be approved into
the SIP prior to redesignation.

C.  The Air Quality Improvement in the Clearfield/Indiana 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 Clearfield/Indiana 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 (tpd)

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)

Year	Point	Area	Mobile	Nonroad	Total

Year 2002	1.2	9.5	10.8	3.6	25.1

Year 2004	1.2	9.2	9.4	3.4	23.2

Diff. (02-04)	0.0	-0.3	-1.4	-0.2	-1.9

Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)

Year	Point	Area 	Mobile	Nonroad	Total 

Year 2002	144.2	1.0	25.1	4.5	174.8

Year 2004	129.3	1.0	22.2	4.2	156.7

Diff. (02-04)	-14.9	0.0	-2.9	-0.3	-18.1

Between 2002 and 2004, VOC emissions were reduced by 1.9 tpd, and NOx
emissions were reduced by 18.1 tpd.  These reductions and anticipated
future reductions are due to the following permanent and enforceable
measures implemented or in the process of being implemented in the
Clearfield/Indiana Area:

Stationary Point Sources 

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

Stationary Area Sources

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

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

     3.	Highway Vehicle Sources

	Federal Motor Vehicle Control Programs (FMVCP)

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

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

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

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

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

      4.   Nonroad Sources

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

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

D.  The Clearfield/Indiana Area Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan
Pursuant to Section 175A of the CAA		

In conjunction with its request to redesignate the Clearfield/Indiana
Area to attainment status, Pennsylvania submitted a SIP revision to
provide for maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the
Clearfield/Indiana Area for at least 10 years after redesignation. 
Pennsylvania is requesting that EPA approve this SIP revision as meeting
the requirement of section 175A of the CAA.  Once approved, the
maintenance plan for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS will ensure that the SIP for
the Clearfield/Indiana Area meets the requirements of the CAA regarding
maintenance of the applicable 8-hour ozone standard.  

What is Required in a Maintenance Plan?	 

Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance plan
for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment.  Under
section 175A, the plan must demonstrate continued attainment of the
applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years after approval of a redesignation
of an area to attainment.  Eight years after the redesignation, the
State must submit a revised maintenance plan demonstrating that
attainment will continue to be maintained for the next 10-year period
following the initial 10-year period.  To address the possibility of
future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must contain such
contingency measures, with a schedule for implementation, as EPA deems
necessary to assure prompt correction of any future 8-hour ozone
violations.  Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a
maintenance plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to
attainment.  The Calcagni memo provides additional guidance on the
content of a maintenance plan.  An ozone maintenance plan should address
the following provisions:  

(1) An attainment emissions inventory;

(2) A maintenance demonstration;

(3) A monitoring network;

(4) Verification of continued attainment; and

(5) A contingency plan.

Analysis of the Clearfield/Indiana Area Maintenance Plan

(a)  Attainment Inventory - An attainment inventory includes the
emissions during the time period associated with the monitoring data
showing attainment.  An attainment inventory year of 2004 was used for
the Clearfield/Indiana Area since it is a reasonable year within the
3-year block of 2004-2006 and accounts for reductions attributable to
implementation of the CAA 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.  

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

   

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

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

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

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

(iv) Mobile nonroad emissions – The 2002 and 2004 emissions for the
majority of nonroad emission source categories were estimated using the
EPA NONROAD 2005 model.  The NONROAD model estimates emissions for
diesel, gasoline, liquefied petroleum gasoline, and compressed natural
gas-fueled nonroad equipment types and includes growth factors.  The
NONROAD model does not estimate emissions from aircraft or locomotives. 
For 2002 and 2004 locomotive emissions, PADEP projected emissions from a
1999 survey using national fuel information and EPA emission and
conversion factors.  There are no commercial aircraft operations in
Clearfield and Indiana counties.  For 2002 and 2004 aircraft emissions,
PADEP estimated emissions using small aircraft operation statistics from
  HYPERLINK "http://www.airnav.com"  www.airnav.com , and emission
factors and operational characteristics in the EPA-approved model,
Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS).

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

(b)  Maintenance Demonstration - On June 14, 2007, PADEP submitted a
maintenance plan as required by section 175A of the CAA.  The
Clearfield/Indiana Area plan shows maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
by demonstrating that current and future emissions of VOC and NOx remain
at or below the attainment year 2004 emissions levels throughout the
Clearfield/Indiana 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
Clearfield/Indiana Area for 2004, 2009, and 2018.  Table 5 reflects the
new methodology used to project future emissions of NOx from EGUs,
submitted on May 23, 2008.  PADEP chose 2009 as an interim year in the
10-year maintenance demonstration period to demonstrate that the VOC and
NOx emissions are not projected to increase above the 2004 attainment
level during the time of the 10-year maintenance period.

Table 4: Total VOC Emissions for 2004-2018 (tons per summer day)

Source Category 	2004      	2009 	2018      

Stationary Point Sources	1.2	1.3	1.5

Stationary Area Sources	9.2	8.4	8.6

Highway Vehicles	9.4	7.2	4.7

Nonroad Engines/Vehicles	3.4	2.8	2.3

Total 	23.2	19.7	17.1



Table 5: Total NOx Emissions 2004-2018 (tons per summer day)

Source Category 	2004      	2009 	2018       

Stationary Point Sources	129.3	89.2	79.1

Stationary Area Sources	1.0	1.1	1.1

Highway Vehicles	22.2	16.3	7.6

Nonroad Engines/Vehicles	4.2	3.5	2.4

Total 	156.7	110.1	90.2



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:   

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

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

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

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

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

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

NLEV Program, which includes the Pennsylvania’s Clean Vehicle Program
for passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks (69 FR 72564, December 28,
1999) - proposed amendments to move the implementation to model year
(MY) 2008

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

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

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

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

							

(c)  Monitoring Network - There are currently two monitors measuring
ozone in the Clearfield/Indiana Area.  Pennsylvania will continue to
operate its current air quality monitors in accordance with 40 CFR part
58. 							

(d)  Verification of Continued Attainment - The Commonwealth will track
the attainment status of the ozone NAAQS in the Clearfield/Indiana Area
by reviewing air quality and emissions during the maintenance period. 
The Commonwealth will perform an annual evaluation of two key factors,
VMT data and emissions reported from stationary sources, and compare
them to the assumptions about these factors used in the maintenance
plan.  The Commonwealth will also evaluate the periodic (every three
years) emission inventories prepared under EPA’s Consolidated Emission
Reporting Regulation (40 CFR 51 Subpart A) to see if the area exceeds
the attainment year inventory (2004) by more than 10 percent.  Based on
these evaluations, the Commonwealth will consider whether any further
emission control measures should be implemented.

(e) The Maintenance Plan’s Contingency Measures - The contingency plan
provisions are designed to promptly correct a violation of the NAAQS
that occurs after redesignation.  Section 175A of the CAA requires that
a maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems
necessary to ensure that the 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 Clearfield/Indiana Area to stay in compliance with
the 8-hour ozone standard after redesignation depends upon VOC and NOx
emissions in the area remaining at or below 2004 levels.  The
Commonwealth’s maintenance plan projects VOC and NOx emissions to
decrease and stay below 2004 levels through the year 2018.  The
Commonwealth’s maintenance plan outlines the procedures for the
adoption and implementation of contingency measures to further reduce
emissions should a violation occur.

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

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

Non-regulatory measures:

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

Diesel retrofit, including replacement, repowering or alternative fuel
use, for public or private local onroad or offroad fleets.

Idling reduction technology for Class 2 yard locomotives.

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

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

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

Regulatory measures:

Additional controls on consumer products

Additional control on portable fuel containers

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

VII.  Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and
Identified in the Maintenance Plan for the Clearfield/Indiana Area
Adequate and Approvable?

A.  What Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets?

Under the CAA, States are required to submit, at various times, control
strategy SIPs and maintenance plans in ozone areas.  These control
strategy SIPs (i.e. 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.  Pursuant to 40 CFR part 93 and
51.112, MVEBs must be established in an ozone maintenance plan.  A MVEB
is the portion of the total allowable emissions that is allocated to
highway and transit vehicle use and emissions.  A MVEB serves as a
ceiling on emissions from an area’s planned transportation system. 
The MVEB concept is further explained in the preamble to the November
24, 1993, transportation conformity rule (58 FR 62188).  The preamble
also describes how to establish and revise the MVEBs in control strategy
SIPs and maintenance plans.  

Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation projects, such as
the construction

of new highways, must “conform” to (i.e., be consistent with) the
part of the State’s air

quality plan that addresses pollution from cars and trucks. 
“Conformity” to the SIP means

that transportation activities will not cause new air quality
violations, worsen existing

violations, or delay timely attainment of or reasonable progress towards
the NAAQS.  If a transportation plan does not “conform,” most new
projects that would expand the capacity of roadways cannot go forward. 
Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth EPA policy, criteria, and
procedures for demonstrating and ensuring conformity of such
transportation activities to a SIP.

When reviewing submitted “control strategy” SIPs or maintenance
plans containing

MVEBs, EPA must affirmatively find the MVEB budget contained therein
“adequate” for

use in determining transportation conformity.  After EPA affirmatively
finds the submitted

MVEB is adequate for transportation conformity purposes, that MVEB can
be used by State

and Federal agencies in determining whether proposed transportation
projects “conform” to

the SIP as required by section 176(c) of the CAA.  EPA’s substantive
criteria for determining “adequacy” of a MVEB are set out in 40 CFR
93.118(e)(4).

EPA’s process for determining “adequacy” consists of three basic
steps:  public notification of a SIP submission, a public comment
period, and EPA’s adequacy finding.  This process for determining the
adequacy of submitted SIP MVEBs was initially outlined in EPA’s May
14, 1999 guidance, “Conformity Guidance on Implementation of March 2,
1999, Conformity Court Decision.”  This guidance was finalized in the
Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for the “New 8-Hour Ozone
and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Miscellaneous
Revisions for Existing Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments
- Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Change” on July 1,
2004 (69 FR 40004).  EPA consults this guidance and follows this
rulemaking in making its adequacy determinations.

The MVEBs for the Clearfield/Indiana 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
Clearfield/Indiana 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 Clearfield/Indiana
Area.  

The total emissions from point, area, mobile on-road, and mobile
non-road sources in 2004 for the Clearfield/Indiana Area equaled 23.2
tpd of VOC and 156.7 tpd of NOx.  The PADEP projected total emissions
out to the year 2018 of 17.1 tpd of VOC and 90.2 tpd of NOx from all
sources in the Clearfield/Indiana Area.  The safety margin for 2018
would be the difference between these amounts, or 6.1 tpd of VOC and
66.5 tpd of NOx.  The emissions up to the level of the attainment year,
including the safety margins, are projected to maintain the area's air
quality consistent with the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.  The safety margin is
the extra emissions reduction below the attainment levels that can be
allocated for emissions by various sources as long as the total emission
levels are maintained at or below the attainment levels.  Table 6 shows
the safety margins for the 2009 and 2018 years.

Table 6:  Safety Margins for Clearfield/Indiana Area tons per summer day
(tpd) (2009 & 2018)

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

2004 Attainment	23.2	156.7

2009 Interim	19.7	110.1

2009 Safety Margin	3.5	46.6

2004 Attainment	23.2	156.7

2018 Final	17.1	90.2

2018 Safety Margin	6.1	66.5



North Central Pennsylvania Regional Planning and Development Commission
RPO MVEB (Clearfield County)

The PADEP allocated 0.24 tpd of VOC and 0.33 tpd of NOx of the 2009
safety margin to the interim VOC projected on-road mobile source
emissions and the 2009 interim NOx projected on-road mobile source
emissions to arrive at the 2009 MVEB to be allocated to the Clearfield
County portion of the Area covered by the North Central Pennsylvania
Regional Planning and Development Commission RPO.

The PADEP also allocated 0.34 tpd of VOC and 0.38 tpd of NOx of the 2018
safety margins to arrive at the 2018 MVEBs to be allocated to the
Clearfield County portion of the Area covered by the North Central PA
Regional Planning and Development Commission RPO.    

Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission MPO MVEB (Indiana County)

The PADEP allocated 0.24 tpd of VOC and 0.36 tpd of NOx of the 2009
safety margin to the interim VOC projected on-road mobile source
emissions and the 2009 interim NOx projected on-road mobile source
emissions to arrive at the 2009 MVEB to be allocated to the Indiana
County portion of the Area covered by the Southwestern Pennsylvania
Commission MPO.

The PADEP also allocated 0.34 tpd of VOC and 0.41 tpd of NOx of the 2018
safety margins to arrive at the 2018 MVEBs to be allocated to the
Indiana County portion of the Area covered by the Southwestern
Pennsylvania Commission MPO.

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.  Tables 7 and 8 show the final 2009 and 2018
MVEBs for the Clearfield/Indiana Area, including the portion of the each
total MVEB that has been allocated to the Clearfield County portion of
the Area (served by the North Central PA Regional Planning and
Development Commission RPO) and for the Indiana County portion of the
Area (served by the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission MPO) and
reflect the changes made in the May 23, 2008 SIP revision:

Table 7: Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for the Clearfield County
Portion of the Clearfield/Indiana Area (2009 & 2018)*

North Central Pennsylvania Regional Planning and Development Commission
RPO

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

2009 Projected On Road (Highway) Emissions	3.87	11.11

2009 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs	0.24	0.33

2009 MVEBs	4.11	11.44

2018 Projected On Road (Highway) Emissions	2.37	4.76

2018 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs	0.34	0.38

2018 MVEBs	2.71	5.14

* PADEP calculates MVEBS using kilograms per summer day, and converts
the values to tons per summer day for informational purposes.  This may
appear to make the totals in the table incorrect, but is merely the
result of the rounded tpd values.

Table 8: Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for the Indiana County Portion
of the Clearfield/Indiana Area (2009 & 2018)*

Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission MPO

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

2009 Projected On Road (Highway) Emissions	2.82	4.49

2009 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs	0.24	0.36

2009 MVEBs	3.06	4.85

2018 Projected On Road (Highway) Emissions	1.58	1.99

2018 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs	0.34	0.41

2018 MVEBs	1.92	2.40

* PADEP calculates MVEBS using kilograms per summer day, and converts
the values to tons per summer day for informational purposes.  This may
appear to make the totals in the table incorrect, but is merely the
result of the rounded tpd values.

			

C.  Why Are the MVEBs Approvable?

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

								

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

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

If EPA receives adverse written comments with respect to the proposed
approval of the Clearfield/Indiana Area MVEBs, or any other aspect of
our proposed approval of this updated maintenance plan, we will respond
to the comments on the MVEBs in our final action or proceed with the
adequacy process as a separate action.  Our action on the
Clearfield/Indiana Area MVEBs will also be announced on EPA's conformity
Web site:

  HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov.otaq/stateresources/transconf/index.htm"
 http://www.epa.gov.otaq/stateresources/transconf/index.htm  (once
there, click on “Adequacy Review of SIP Submissions”).

VIII.   Proposed Actions

EPA is proposing to determine that the Clearfield/Indiana Area has
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.  EPA is also proposing to approve the
redesignation of the 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 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
Clearfield/Indiana Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour
ozone standard.  EPA is also proposing to approve the associated
maintenance plan for the Clearfield/Indiana Area as a revision to the
Pennsylvania SIP, submitted on June 14, 2007.  EPA is also proposing to
approve the May 23, 2008 submittal that replaces the former methodology
for projecting future emissions of NOx from EGUs, as well as the MVEBs
submitted on June 14, 2007.  EPA is proposing to approve the maintenance
plan for the Clearfield/Indiana 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
Clearfield/Indiana Area, submitted by PADEP on June 14, 2007 and a
supplemental submittal on May 23, 2008.  Finally, EPA is proposing to
approve the MVEBs submitted by Pennsylvania for the Clearfield/Indiana
Area in conjunction with its redesignation request.  EPA is soliciting
public comments on the issues discussed in this document.  These
comments will be considered before taking final action.

IX.  Statutory and Executive Order Reviews   



Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
proposed action is not a "significant regulatory action" and therefore
is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.  For
this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
"Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use"  (66 Fed. Reg. 28355 (May 22, 2001)).  This action
merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and
imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Redesignation of an area to attainment under section 107(d)(3)(e) of the
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
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 (Public Law 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 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 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 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
Clearfield/Indiana 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.

									

							

_July 9, 2008_______                                   
__________/s/_______________      

Dated:                                 		            Donald S. Welsh,

						Regional Administrator, 				

						Region III.						

 PAGE   

 PAGE  3 

  PAGE   4 

  PAGE   10 

  PAGE   46 

  PAGE   49 

