[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 103 (Wednesday, May 30, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29901-29914]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-10356]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0175; FRL-8319-9]


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

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

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

[[Page 29902]]

EPA is proposing approval of the redesignation request, and the 
maintenance plan and the 2002 base year inventory SIP revisions in 
accordance with the requirements of the CAA.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 29, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2007-0175 by one of the following methods:
    A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    B. E-mail: [email protected].
    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0175, Linda Miller, Acting Chief, Air 
Quality Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    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-
2007-0175. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online 
at 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 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 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 the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental 
Protection, Bureau of Air Quality, P.O. Box 8468, Harrisburg, 
Pennsylvania 17105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Cripps, (215) 814-2179, or 
by e-mail at [email protected].

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

Table of Contents

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

I. What Actions Are EPA Proposing To Take?

    On January 25, 2007, PADEP formally submitted a request to 
redesignate the Reading Area from nonattainment to attainment of the 8-
hour NAAQS for ozone. Concurrently, on January 25, 2007, PADEP 
submitted a maintenance plan for the Reading Area as a SIP revision to 
ensure continued attainment of the 8-hour NAAQS for at least 10 years 
after redesignation and continued attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS 
until 2018. PADEP submitted a supplement to the technical support for 
the maintenance plan on April 12, 2007. (Hereafter, when we say the 
maintenance plan was submitted on January 25, 2007 we mean that it 
submitted on January 25, 2007, with a supplement submitted on April 12, 
2007.) PADEP also submitted a 2002 base year inventory as a SIP 
revision on January 25, 2007. The Reading Area is currently designated 
as a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment area and is covered by a 
maintenance plan for the 1-hour NAAQS. EPA is proposing to determine 
that the Reading Area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS and that it 
has met the requirements for redesignation pursuant to section 
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is, therefore, proposing to approve the 
redesignation request to change the designation of the Reading Area 
from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is 
also proposing to approve the Reading Area maintenance plan as a SIP 
revision, such approval being one of the CAA criteria for redesignation 
to attainment status. The maintenance plan is designed to ensure 
continued attainment in the Reading Area for the next ten years. EPA is 
also proposing to approve the 2002 base year inventory for the Reading 
Area as a SIP revision. Additionally, EPA is announcing its action on 
the adequacy process for the MVEBs identified in the Reading Area 
maintenance plan, and proposing to approve the MVEBs identified for 
volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) 
for transportation conformity purposes.

II. What Is the Background for These Proposed Actions?

A. General

    Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources. Rather, 
emissions of NOX and VOC react in the presence of sunlight 
to form ground-level ozone. The air pollutants NOX and VOC 
are referred to as precursors of ozone. The CAA establishes a process 
for air quality management through the attainment and maintenance of 
the NAAQS.
    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone standard 
of 0.08 parts per million (ppm). This new standard is more stringent 
than the previous 1-hour ozone standard. EPA designated, as 
nonattainment, any area violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the 
air quality data for the three years of 2001-2003. These were the most 
recent three years of data at the time EPA designated 8-hour areas. The 
Reading Area was designated as basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment status 
in a Federal Register notice signed on April 15, 2004 and published on 
April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857), based on its exceedance of the 8-hour 
health-based standard for ozone during the years 2001-2003. On April 
30, 2004, EPA

[[Page 29903]]

issued a final rule (69 FR 23951, 23996) to revoke the 1-hour ozone 
NAAQS in the Reading Area (as well as most other areas of the country) 
effective June 15, 2005. See 40 CFR 50.9(b); 69 FR at 23996 (April 30, 
2004); and see 70 FR 44470 (August 3, 2005).
    However, on December 22, 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 
District of Columbia Circuit vacated EPA's Phase 1 Implementation Rule 
for the 8-hour Ozone Standard. (69 FR 23951, April 30, 2004). South 
Coast Air Quality Management Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C.Cir. 2006) 
(hereafter ``South Coast.''). The Court held that certain provisions of 
EPA's Phase 1 Rule were inconsistent with the requirements of the Clean 
Air Act. The Court rejected EPA's reasons for implementing the 8-hour 
standard in nonattainment areas under Subpart 1 in lieu of subpart 2 of 
Title I, part D of the Act. The Court also held that EPA improperly 
failed to retain four measures required for 1-hour nonattainment areas 
under the anti-backsliding provisions of the regulations: (1) 
Nonattainment area New Source Review (NSR) requirements based on an 
area's 1-hour nonattainment classification; (2) Section 185 penalty 
fees for 1-hour severe or extreme nonattainment areas; (3) measures to 
be implemented pursuant to section 172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9) of the Act, 
on the contingency of an area not making reasonable further progress 
toward attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or for failure to attain that 
NAAQS; and (4) the certain conformity requirements for certain types of 
federal actions. The Court upheld EPA's authority to revoke the 1-hour 
standard provided there were adequate anti-backsliding provisions. 
Elsewhere in this document, mainly in section VI. B. ``The Reading Area 
Has Met All Applicable Requirements under Section 110 and Part D of the 
CAA and Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) of the CAA,'' EPA 
discusses its rationale why the decision in South Coast is not an 
impediment to redesignating the Reading Area to attainment of the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS.
    The CAA, Title I, Part D, contains two sets of provisions--subpart 
1 and subpart 2--that address planning and control requirements for 
nonattainment areas. Subpart 1 (which EPA refers to as ``basic'' 
nonattainment) contains general, less prescriptive requirements for 
nonattainment areas for any pollutant--including ozone--governed by a 
NAAQS. Subpart 2 (which EPA refers to as ``classified'' nonattainment) 
provides more specific requirements for ozone nonattainment areas. Some 
8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are subject only to the provisions of 
subpart 1. Other areas are also subject to the provisions of subpart 2. 
Under EPA's 8-hour ozone implementation rule, signed on April 15, 2004, 
an area was classified under subpart 2 based on its 8-hour ozone design 
value (i.e., the 3-year average annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-
hour average ozone concentration), if it had a 1-hour design value at 
or above 0.121 ppm (the lowest 1-hour design value in the CAA for 
subpart 2 requirements). All other areas are covered under subpart 1, 
based upon their 8-hour design values. In 2004, Reading Area was 
designated a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment area based upon air 
quality monitoring data from 2001-2003, and therefore, is subject to 
the requirements of subpart 1 of Part D.
    Under 40 CFR part 50, the 8-hour ozone standard is attained when 
the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour 
average ambient air quality ozone concentrations is less than or equal 
to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when rounding is considered). See 69 FR 
23857, (April 30, 2004) for further information. Ambient air quality 
monitoring data for the 3-year period must meet data completeness 
requirements. The data completeness requirements are met when the 
average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring data is greater 
than 90 percent, and no single year has less than 75 percent data 
completeness as determined in Appendix I of 40 CFR part 50. The ozone 
monitoring data from the 3-year period of 2003-2005 indicates that the 
Reading Area has a design value of 0.080 ppm. Therefore, the ambient 
ozone data for the Reading Area indicates no violations of the 8-hour 
ozone standard.

B. The Reading Area

    The Reading Area consists solely of Berks County, Pennsylvania and 
was designated as basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment status in an April 
30, 2004 Final Rule (69 FR 23857). Prior to its designation as an 8-
hour basic ozone nonattainment area, the Reading Area was designated an 
incomplete data nonattainment area for the 1-hour standard. See 56 FR 
56694 at 56822, November 6, 1991. Prior to its designation as an 8-hour 
ozone nonattainment area, the Reading Area had been designated and 
classified as a moderate ozone nonattainment area for the 1-hour 
standard. See 56 FR 56694 at 56822, November 6, 1991. On May 7, 1997 
(62 FR 24826), EPA approved a request to redesignate the Reading area 
to attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard and approved a maintenance 
plan SIP revision.
    On January 25, 2007, PADEP requested that the Reading Area be 
redesignated to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. The 
redesignation request included 3 years of complete, quality-assured 
data for the period of 2003-2005, indicating that the 8-hour NAAQS for 
ozone had been achieved in the Reading Area. The data satisfies the CAA 
requirements when the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily 
maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration (commonly referred to as the 
area's design value) is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm 
when rounding is considered). Under the CAA, a nonattainment area may 
be redesignated if sufficient complete, quality-assured data is 
available to determine that the area has attained the standard and the 
area meets the other CAA redesignation requirements set forth in 
section 107(d)(3)(E).

III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?

    The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment 
area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, 
allows for redesignation, providing that:
    (1) EPA determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS;
    (2) EPA has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for 
the area under section 110(k);
    (3) EPA determines that the improvement in air quality is due to 
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from 
implementation of the applicable SIP and applicable Federal air 
pollutant control regulations and other permanent and enforceable 
reductions;
    (4) EPA has fully approved a maintenance plan for the area as 
meeting the requirements of section 175A; and
    (5) The State containing such area has met all requirements 
applicable to the area under section 110 and Part D.
    EPA provided guidance on redesignation in the General Preamble for 
the Implementation of Title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990, on April 
16, 1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented this guidance on April 28, 
1992 (57 FR 18070). EPA has provided further guidance on processing 
redesignation requests in the following documents:
     ``Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value Calculations'', 
Memorandum from Bill Laxton, June 18, 1990;
     ``Maintenance Plans for Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon 
Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief,

[[Page 29904]]

Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, April 30, 1992;
     ``Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) 
Redesignations,'' Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon 
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 1992;
     ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas 
to Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 
Management Division, September 4, 1992;
     ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in 
Response to Clean Air Act (Act) Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John 
Calcagni Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;
     ``Technical Support Documents (TSD's) for Redesignation 
Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from 
G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17, 
1993;
     ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas 
Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and 
Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) On 
or After November 15, 1992,'' Memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, 
Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, September 17, 
1993
     Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, Acting Director, Air 
Quality Management Division, to Air Division Directors, Regions 1-10, 
``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for Ozone and 
CO Nonattainment Areas,'' dated November 30, 1993;
     ``Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for 
Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' Memorandum from Mary D. 
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14, 
1994; and
     ``Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration, 
and Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the 
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard,'' Memorandum from John S. 
Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, May 10, 
1995.

IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?

    On January 25, 2007, PADEP requested redesignation of the Reading 
Area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. On January 25, 2007, 
PADEP submitted a maintenance plan for the Reading Area as a SIP 
revision to assure continued attainment at least 10 years after 
redesignation. EPA has determined that the Reading Area has attained 
the standard and has met the requirements for redesignation set forth 
in section 107(d)(3)(E).

V. What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?

    Approval of the redesignation request would change the designation 
of the Reading Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS found at 40 CFR part 81. It would also incorporate into the 
Pennsylvania SIP a 2002 base year inventory and a maintenance plan 
ensuring continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Reading 
Area for the next 10 years. The maintenance plan includes contingency 
measures to remedy any future violations of the 8-hour NAAQS (should 
they occur), and identifies the MVEBs for NOX and VOC for 
transportation conformity purposes for the years 2004, 2009 and 2018. 
These motor vehicle emissions (2004) and MVEBs (2009 and 2018) are 
displayed in the following table:

        Table 1.--Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in Tons Per Day
                     [Rounded to one decimal place]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Year                            VOC        NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009..............................................       13.1       21.3
2018..............................................        7.5        9.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. What Is EPA's Analysis of the State's Request and SIP Revision?

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

A. The Reading Area Has Attained the Ozone NAAQS

    In the Reading Area, there is one monitor that measures air quality 
with respect to ozone. As part of its redesignation request, 
Pennsylvania submitted ozone monitoring data for the years 2003-2005 
(the most recent three years of data available as of the time of the 
redesignation request) for the Reading Area. This data has been quality 
assured and is recorded in AQS.
    Based upon this data, EPA is proposing to determine that the 
Reading Area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. For the 8-hour ozone 
standard, an area may be considered to be attaining the 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS if there are no violations, as determined in accordance with 40 
CFR 50.10 and Appendix I of part 50, based on three complete and 
consecutive calendar years of quality-assured air quality monitoring 
data. To attain this standard, the design value, which is the 3-year 
average of the fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone 
concentrations, measured at each monitor within the area over each year 
must not exceed the ozone standard of 0.08 ppm. Based on the rounding 
convention described in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix I, the standard is 
attained if the design value is 0.084 ppm or below. The data must be 
collected and quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and 
recorded in EPA's Air Quality System (AQS). PADEP uses the AQS as the 
permanent database to maintain its data and quality assures the data 
transfers and content for accuracy. The monitors generally should have 
remained at the same location for the duration of the monitoring period 
required for demonstrating attainment. The fourth-high 8-hour daily 
maximum concentrations, along with the three-year average, are 
summarized in Table 2A.

    Table 2A.--Reading Nonattainment Area Fourth Highest 8-Hour Ozone
Values; UGI Co Mongantown Rd and Prospect St Reading Berks Co, AQS ID 42-
                                011-0009
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Annual 4th
                          Year                             high reading
                                                               (ppm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2003....................................................           0.080
2004....................................................           0.076
2005....................................................           0.085
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The average for the 3-year period 2003 through 2005 is 0.080 ppm.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The air quality data for 2003-2005 show that the Reading Area has 
attained the standard with a design value of 0.080 ppm. The data 
collected at the Reading Area monitor satisfies the CAA requirement 
that the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-
hour average ozone concentration is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm. 
PADEP's request for redesignation for the Reading Area indicates that 
the data was quality assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. In 
addition, as discussed below with respect to the maintenance plan, 
PADEP has committed to continue monitoring in accordance with 40 CFR 
part 58. EPA believes this conclusion remains valid that after review 
of the quality assured 2006 data because the design value for 2004-2006 
would be 0.079 ppm. In summary, EPA has determined that the data 
submitted by Pennsylvania and

[[Page 29905]]

taken from AQS indicates that Reading Area has attained the 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS.
    Based upon the ozone monitoring data for the years 2003-2005, EPA 
believes that the Reading Area is still in attainment for the 1-hour 
ozone NAAQS. For the 1-hour ozone standard, an area may be considered 
to be attaining the 1-hour ozone NAAQS if there are no violations, as 
determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.9 and Appendix H of part 50, 
based on three complete and consecutive calendar years of quality-
assured air quality monitoring data. Compliance is determined on a 
monitor-by-monitor basis within the area. To demonstrate attainment, 
i.e., compliance with this standard, the annual average of the number 
of expected exceedances of the 1-hour standard over a 3-year period 
must be less than or equal to 1. (To account for missing data, 
adjustment of the actual number of monitored exceedances of the 
standard yields the annual expected number of exceedances at an air 
quality monitoring site.) Table 2B provides a summary of the number of 
expected exceedances for each of the years 2003 through 2005 and three-
year annual average.

 Table 2B.--Reading Nonattainment Area Number of Expected Exceedances of
 the 1-Hour Ozone Standard; UGI Co Mongantown Rd and Prospect St Reading
                      Berks Co, AQS ID 42-011-0009
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Number of
                          Year                               expected
                                                            exceedances
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2003....................................................             1.0
2004....................................................             0.0
2005....................................................             0.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  The average number of expected exceedances for the 3-year period 2003
                          through 2005 is 0.3.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In summary, EPA has determined that the data submitted by 
Pennsylvania and taken from AQS indicates that Reading Area is 
maintaining air quality that conforms to the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA 
believes this conclusion remains valid after review of the quality 
assured 2006 data because no exceedances were recorded in the Reading 
Area in 2006.

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

    EPA has determined that the Reading Area has met all SIP 
requirements applicable for purposes of this redesignation under 
section 110 of the CAA (General SIP Requirements) and that it meets all 
applicable SIP requirements under Part D of Title I of the CAA, in 
accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, EPA has 
determined that the SIP is fully approved with respect to all 
requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation in accordance 
with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these proposed determinations, 
EPA ascertained what requirements are applicable to the area, and 
determined that the applicable portions of the SIP meeting these 
requirements are fully approved under section 110(k) of the CAA. We 
note that SIPs must be fully approved only with respect to applicable 
requirements.
    The September 4, 1992 Calcagni memorandum (``Procedures for 
Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' Memorandum 
from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, 
September 4, 1992) describes EPA's interpretation of section 
107(d)(3)(E) with respect to the timing of applicable requirements. 
Under this interpretation, to qualify for redesignation, States 
requesting redesignation to attainment must meet only the relevant CAA 
requirements that come due prior to the submittal of a complete 
redesignation request. See also Michael Shapiro memorandum, September 
17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66, (March 7, 1995) (redesignation of 
Detroit-Ann Arbor). Applicable requirements of the CAA that come due 
subsequent to the area's submittal of a complete redesignation request 
remain applicable until a redesignation is approved, but are not 
required as a prerequisite to redesignation. Section 175A(c) of the 
CAA. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also 68 FR 
25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of St. Louis).
    This section also sets forth EPA's views on the potential effect of 
the Court's ruling in South Coast on this redesignation action. For the 
reasons set forth below, EPA does not believe that the Court's ruling 
alters any requirements relevant to this redesignation action so as to 
preclude redesignation, and does not prevent EPA from finalizing this 
redesignation. EPA believes that the Court's decision, as it currently 
stands or as it may be modified based upon any petition for rehearing 
that has been filed, imposes no impediment to moving forward with 
redesignation of this area to attainment, because in either 
circumstance redesignation is appropriate under the relevant 
redesignation provisions of the Act and longstanding policies regarding 
redesignation requests.
1. Section 110 General SIP Requirements
    Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the CAA delineates the general 
requirements for a SIP, which include enforceable emissions limitations 
and other control measures, means, or techniques, provisions for the 
establishment and operation of appropriate devices necessary to collect 
data on ambient air quality, and programs to enforce the limitations. 
The general SIP elements and requirements set forth in section 
110(a)(2) include, but are not limited to, the following:
     Submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the State 
after reasonable public notice and hearing;
     Provisions for establishment and operation of appropriate 
procedures needed to monitor ambient air quality;
     Implementation of a source permit program; provisions for 
the implementation of Part C requirement (Prevention of Significant 
Deterioration (PSD));
     Provisions for the implementation of Part D requirements 
for New Source Review (NSR) permit programs;
     Provisions for air pollution modeling; and
     Provisions for public and local agency participation in 
planning and emission control rule development.
    Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to 
prevent sources in a State from significantly contributing to air 
quality problems in another State. To implement this provision, EPA has 
required certain States to establish programs to address transport of 
air pollutants in accordance with the NOX SIP Call, October 
27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), amendments to the NOX SIP Call, May 
14, 1999 (64 FR 26298) and March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11222), and the Clean 
Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162). However, the 
section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a State are not linked with a 
particular nonattainment area's designation and classification in that 
State. EPA believes that the requirements linked with a particular 
nonattainment area's designation and classifications are the relevant 
measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. The

[[Page 29906]]

transport SIP submittal requirements, where applicable, continue to 
apply to a State regardless of the designation of any one particular 
area in the State. Thus, we do not believe that these requirements 
should be construed to be applicable requirements for purposes of 
redesignation. In addition, EPA believes that the other section 110 
elements not connected with nonattainment plan submissions and not 
linked with an area's attainment status are not applicable requirements 
for purposes of redesignation. The Reading Area will still be subject 
to these requirements after it is redesignated. The section 110 and 
Part D requirements, which are linked with a particular area's 
designation and classification, are the relevant measures to evaluate 
in reviewing a redesignation request. This policy is consistent with 
EPA's existing policy on applicability of conformity (i.e., for 
redesignations) and oxygenated fuels requirement. See Reading, 
Pennsylvania, proposed and final rulemakings, (61 FR 53174-53176, 
October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24816, May 7, 1997); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, 
Ohio, final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida, 
final rulemaking (60 FR 62748, December 7, 1995). See also the 
discussion on this issue in the Cincinnati redesignation (65 FR at 
37890, June 19, 2000), and in the Pittsburgh redesignation (66 FR at 
50399, October 19, 2001). Similarly, with respect to the NOX 
SIP Call rules, EPA noted in its Phase 1 Final Rule to Implement the 8-
hour Ozone NAAQS, that the NOX SIP Call rules are not ``an 
`applicable requirement' for purposes of section 110(l) because the 
NOX rules apply regardless of an area's attainment or 
nonattainment status for the 8-hour (or the 1-hour) NAAQS.'' 69 FR 
23951, 23983 (April 30, 2004).
    EPA believes that section 110 elements not linked to the area's 
nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation. 
Any section 110 requirements that are linked to the Part D requirements 
for 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are not yet due, because, as we 
explain later in this notice, no Part D requirements applicable for 
purposes of redesignation under the 8-hour standard became due prior to 
submission of the redesignation request.
    Because the Pennsylvania SIP satisfies all of the applicable 
general SIP elements and requirements set forth in section 110(a)(2), 
EPA concludes that Pennsylvania has satisfied the criterion of section 
107(d)(3)(E) regarding section 110 of the Act.
2. Part D Nonattainment Area Requirements Under the 8-Hour Standard
    Sections 172-176 of the CAA, found in subpart 1 of Part D, set 
forth the basic nonattainment requirements for all nonattainment areas. 
Section 182 of the CAA, found in subpart 2 of Part D, establishes 
additional specific requirements depending on the area's nonattainment 
classification.
    Under an April 30, 2004, final rule (69 FR 23951), EPA classified 
the Reading Area as a subpart 1 nonattainment area under the 8-hour 
ozone standard. EPA believes that no subpart 1 requirements need to be 
approved prior to redesignation. Of the nonattainment plan provisions 
due under section 172, none were due prior to redesignation because 
EPA's November 29, 2005 final rule (70 FR 71612) set the deadline for 
these requirements at 3 years after resignation which for the Reading 
Area is June 15, 2007.
    With respect to the 8-hour standard, the Court's ruling in South 
Coast rejected EPA's reasons for classifying areas under Subpart 1 for 
the 8-hour standard, and remanded that matter to the Agency. 
Consequently, it is possible that this area could, during a remand to 
EPA, be reclassified under Subpart 2. Although any future decision by 
EPA to classify this area under subpart 2 might trigger additional 
future requirements for the area, EPA believes that this does not mean 
that redesignation cannot now go forward. This belief is based upon (1) 
EPA's longstanding policy of evaluating requirements in accordance with 
the requirements due at the time the request is submitted; and (2) 
consideration of the inequity of applying retroactively any 
requirements that might in the future be applied.
    First, at the time the redesignation request was submitted, the 
Reading Area was classified under Subpart 1 and was obligated to meet 
Subpart 1 requirements. Under EPA's longstanding interpretation of 
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act, to qualify for 
redesignation, states requesting redesignation to attainment must meet 
only the relevant SIP requirements that came due prior to the submittal 
of a complete redesignation request. See September 4, 1992 Calcagni 
memorandum (``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas 
to Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 
Management Division). See also, Michael Shapiro Memorandum, September 
17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66 (March 7, 1995) (Redesignation of 
Detroit-Ann Arbor); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004), 
which upheld this interpretation; 68 FR 25418, at 25424, 25427 (May 12, 
2003) (redesignation of St. Louis).
    Moreover, it would be inequitable to retroactively apply any new 
SIP requirements that were not applicable at the time the request was 
submitted. The D.C. Circuit has recognized the inequity in such 
retroactive rulemaking, see Sierra Club v. Whitman, 285 F. 3d 63 (D.C. 
Cir. 2002), in which the D.C. Circuit upheld a District Court's ruling 
refusing to make retroactive an EPA determination of nonattainment that 
was past the statutory due date. Such a determination would have 
resulted in the imposition of additional requirements on the area. The 
Court stated: ``Although EPA failed to make the nonattainment 
determination within the statutory time frame, Sierra Club's proposed 
solution only makes the situation worse. Retroactive relief would 
likely impose large costs on the States, which would face fines and 
suits for not implementing air pollution prevention plans in 1997, even 
though they were not on notice at the time.'' Id. at 68. Similarly here 
it would be unfair to penalize the area by applying to it for purposes 
of redesignation additional SIP requirements under Subpart 2 that were 
not in effect at the time it submitted its redesignation request.
    With respect to subpart 2 requirements, if the Reading Area 
initially had been classified under subpart the first two part D 
subpart 2 requirements applicable to the Reading Area under section 
182(a) of the CAA would be: (1) A base-year inventory requirement 
pursuant to section 182(a)(1) of the CAA, and, (2) the emissions 
statement requirement pursuant to section 182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA.
    As we have stated previously in this document, these requirements 
are not yet due for purpose of redesignation of the Reading Area, but 
nevertheless, Pennsylvania already has in its approved SIP an emissions 
statement rule for the 1-hour standard which covers all portions of the 
Reading Area and which EPA believes satisfies the emissions statement 
requirement for the 8-hour standard under section 182(a)(3)(B). This 
regulation is codified at Section 135.21 ``Emission statements'' in 
Chapter 135 of 40 CFR 52.2020(c)(1); see also 60 FR 2881, January 12, 
1995. With respect to the base year inventory requirement, in this 
notice of proposed rulemaking, EPA is proposing to approve the 2002 
base year inventory SIP concurrently with the maintenance plan as 
fulfilling the requirements, if

[[Page 29907]]

necessary, of both section 182(a)(1) and section 172(c)(3) of the CAA.
    With respect to the 8-hour standard, EPA proposes to determine that 
Pennsylvania's SIP meets all applicable SIP requirements under Part D 
of the CAA. In addition to the fact that Part D requirements applicable 
for purposes of redesignation did not become due prior to submission of 
the redesignation request, EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret 
the general conformity and NSR requirements as not requiring approval 
prior to redesignation.
    With respect to section 176, Conformity Requirements, section 
176(c) of the CAA requires States to establish criteria and procedures 
to ensure that Federally supported or funded projects conform to the 
air quality planning goals in the applicable SIP. The requirement to 
determine conformity applies to transportation plans, programs, and 
projects developed, funded or approved under Title 23 U.S.C. and the 
Federal Transit Act (``transportation conformity'') as well as to all 
other Federally supported or funded projects (``general conformity''). 
State conformity revisions must be consistent with Federal conformity 
regulations relating to consultation, enforcement and enforceability 
that the CAA required EPA to promulgate. EPA believes it is reasonable 
to interpret the conformity SIP requirements as not applying for 
purposes of evaluating the redesignation request under section 107(d) 
since State conformity rules are still required after redesignation and 
Federal conformity rules apply where State rules have not been 
approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F. 3d 426, 438-440 (6th Cir. 2001), 
upholding this interpretation. See also 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995).
    In the case of the Reading Area, EPA has also determined that 
before being redesignated, the Reading Area need not comply with the 
requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to redesignation. EPA 
has determined that areas being redesignated need not comply with the 
requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to redesignation, 
provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the standard without 
Part D NSR in effect. The rationale for this position is described in a 
memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and 
Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled, ``Part D NSR Requirements 
or Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.'' See rulemakings for 
Detroit, Michigan (60 FR at 12467-68); Cleveland-Akron-Lorrain, Ohio 
(61 FR at 20458, 20469-70); Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665, 53669 
October 23, 2001); Grand Rapids, Michigan (61 FR at 31831, 31834-37, 
June 21, 1996). In the case of the Reading Area, the Chapter 127 Part D 
NSR regulations in the Pennsylvania SIP (codified at 40 CFR 
52.2020(c)(1)) explicitly apply the requirements for NSR in section 184 
of the CAA to ozone attainment areas within the OTR. The OTR NSR 
requirements are more stringent than that required for a subpart 1/
basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. On October 19, 2001 (66 FR 
53094), EPA fully approved Pennsylvania's NSR SIP revision consisting 
of Pennsylvania's Chapter 127 Part D NSR regulations that cover the 
Reading Area.
    EPA has also interpreted the section 184 OTR requirements, 
including the NSR program, as not being applicable for purposes of 
redesignation. The rational for this is based on two factors. First, 
the requirement to submit SIP revisions for the section 184 
requirements continues to apply to areas in the OTR after redesignation 
to attainment. Therefore, the State remains obligated to have NSR, as 
well as RACT, even after redesignation. Second, the section 184 control 
measures are region-wide requirements and do not apply to the Reading 
Area by virtue of the area's designation and classification. Rather, 
section 184 measures are required in the Reading Area because it is 
located in the OTR. See 61 FR 53174, 53175-53176 (October 10, 1996) and 
62 FR 24826, 24830-32 (May 7, 1997).
3. Part D Nonattainment Area Requirements Under the 1-Hour Standard
    As stated previously in this document, on May 7, 1997 (62 FR 
24826), EPA approved a request to redesignate the Reading Area to 
attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard and approved a maintenance plan 
SIP revision. In order to redesignate the area to attainment of the 1-
hour ozone standard, EPA determined that Pennsylvania had fulfilled all 
Part D requirements applicable to the Reading Area as a consequence of 
its classification as a moderate ozone nonattainment. See Reading final 
(62 FR 24826, May 7, 1997) and proposed rules (61 FR 53174, October 10, 
1996).
    With respect to the requirements under the 1-hour standard, the 
Reading Area was an attainment area subject to a Clean Air Act section 
175A maintenance plan under the 1-hour standard. The Court's ruling in 
South Coast does not impact redesignation requests for these types of 
areas.
    First, there are no conformity requirements that are relevant for 
redesignation requests, including the requirement to submit a 
transportation conformity SIP.\1\ As we have previously stated in this 
document, EPA believes that it is reasonable to interpret the 
conformity SIP requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating 
a redesignation request under section 107(d) because state conformity 
rules are still required after redesignation and federal conformity 
rules apply where state rules have not been approved. See 40 CFR 
51.390. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding this 
interpretation. See also 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995) (Tampa, FL 
redesignation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Clean Air Act section 176(c)(4)(E) currently requires States 
to submit revisions to their SIPs to reflect certain federal 
criteria and procedures for determining transportation conformity. 
Transportation conformity SIPs are different from the motor vehicle 
emissions budgets that are established in control strategy SIPs and 
maintenance plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, with respect to the three other anti-backsliding provisions 
for the 1-hour standard that the Court found were not properly 
retained, the Reading Area is an attainment area subject to a 
maintenance plan for the 1-hour standard, and the NSR, contingency 
measure (pursuant to section 172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9)), and fee provision 
requirements no longer apply to an area that has been redesignated to 
attainment of the 1-hour standard.
    Thus the decision in South Coast should not alter any requirements 
that would preclude EPA from finalizing the redesignation of this area.
4. Transport Region Requirements
    All areas in the Ozone Transport Region (OTR), both attainment and 
nonattainment, are subject to additional control requirements under 
section 184 for the purpose of reducing interstate transport of 
emissions that may contribute to downwind ozone nonattainment. The 
section 184 requirements include reasonably available control 
technology (RACT), NSR, enhanced vehicle inspection and maintenance, 
and Stage II vapor recovery or a comparable measure. In the case of the 
Reading Area, which is located in the OTR, nonattainment NSR will be 
applicable after redesignation. On October 19, 2001 (66 FR 53094), EPA 
fully approved Pennsylvania's NSR SIP revision consisting of 
Pennsylvania's Chapter 127 Part D NSR regulations that cover the 
Reading Area. The Chapter 127 Part D NSR regulations in the 
Pennsylvania SIP explicitly apply the requirements for NSR of section 
184 of the CAA to attainment areas within the OTR.

[[Page 29908]]

    EPA has also interpreted the section 184 OTR requirements, 
including NSR, as not being applicable for purposes of redesignation. 
See 61 FR 53174, October 10, 1996 and 62 FR 24826, May 7, 1997 
(Reading, Pennsylvania Redesignation). The rationale for this is based 
on two considerations. First, the requirement to submit SIP revisions 
for the section 184 requirements continues to apply to areas in the OTR 
after redesignation to attainment. Therefore, the State remains 
obligated to have NSR, as well as RACT, and I/M even after 
redesignation. Second, the section 184 control measures are region-wide 
requirements and do not apply to the area by virtue of the area's 
nonattainment designation and classification, and thus are properly 
considered not relevant to an action changing an area's designation. 
See 61 FR 53174 at 53175-53176 (October 10, 1996) and 62 FR 24826 at 
24830-24832 (May 7, 1997).
5. The Reading Area Has a Fully Approved SIP for the Purposes of 
Redesignation
    EPA has fully approved the Pennsylvania SIP for the purposes of 
redesignation. EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a 
redesignation request. Calcagni Memo, p. 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania 
Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F. 3d 984, 989-90 (6th Cir. 1998), Wall 
v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), plus any additional measures it 
may approve in conjunction with a redesignation action. See 68 FR at 
25425 (May 12, 2003) and citations therein. The Reading Area was a 1-
hour maintenance area which had been a moderate nonattainment area at 
the time of its designation as a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment area 
on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857). No Part D submittal requirements have 
come due prior to the submittal of the 8-hour maintenance plan for the 
area. Therefore, all Part D submittal requirements have been fulfilled. 
Because there are no outstanding SIP submission requirements applicable 
for the purposes of redesignation of the Reading Area, the applicable 
implementation plan satisfies all pertinent SIP requirements. As 
indicated previously, EPA believes that the section 110 elements not 
connected with Part D nonattainment plan submissions and not linked to 
the area's nonattainment status are not applicable requirements for 
purposes of redesignation. EPA also believes that Pennsylvania has 
fulfilled all 8-hour Part D requirements applicable for purposes of 
redesignation.

C. The Air Quality Improvement in the Reading Area Is Due to Permanent 
and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions Resulting From Implementation 
of the SIP and Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control Regulations and 
Other Permanent and Enforceable Reductions

    EPA believes that the Commonwealth has demonstrated that the 
observed air quality improvement in the Reading Area is due to 
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from 
implementation of the SIP, Federal measures, and other State-adopted 
measures. Emissions reductions attributable to these rules are shown in 
Table 3.

                  Table 3.--Total VOC and NOX Emissions for 2002 and 2004 in Tons Per Day (tpd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Year                              Point       Area     Nonroad     Mobile     Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 2002................................................        4.7       21.8        8.4       20.1       55.0
Year 2004................................................        4.7       21.7        8.1       17.0       51.5
Diff. (02-04)............................................        0.0        0.1        0.3        3.1        3.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Nitrogen Oxides (NOX)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 2002................................................       14.5        2.1       10.9       34.1       61.6
Year 2004................................................       16.0        2.1       10.3       29.8       58.2
Difference (02-04).......................................       -1.5        0.0        0.6        4.3        3.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

(1) Stationary Area Sources
    (a) Solvent Cleaning (68 FR 2206, January 16, 2003)
    (b) Portable Fuel Containers (69 FR 70893, December 8, 2004)
(2) Highway Vehicle Sources
    (a) Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP), Tier 1 (56 FR 
25724, June 5, 1991) and Tier 2 (65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000)
    (b) Federal Heavy Duty Engines and Vehicles Standards (62 FR 54694, 
October 21, 1997 and 65 FR 59896, October 6, 2000)
    (c) National Low Emission Vehicle (NLEV) (64 FR 72564, December 28, 
1999)
    (d) Vehicle Safety Inspection Program (70 FR 58313, October 6, 
2005)
(3) Nonroad Sources--Federal Nonroad Engine and Fuels (40 CFR parts 89 
to 91, and 1039, 1048 and 1051)

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

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

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

[[Page 29909]]

1. What is required in a maintenance plan?
    Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance 
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. 
Under section 175A(a), the plan must demonstrate continued attainment 
of the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years after approval of a 
redesignation of an area to attainment. Section 175A(b) requires that 
eight years after the redesignation the State must submit a revised 
maintenance plan demonstrating that attainment will continue to be 
maintained for the next 10-year period following the initial 10-year 
period. That is, the maintenance demonstration under section 175A(b) 
must ensure maintenance for a total of 20 years after redesignation to 
attainment. For the Reading Area the total demonstrated period of 
maintenance for the 1-hour NAAQS under section 175A(b) would be until 
2017 which is 20 years after the area's redesignation to attainment in 
1997. To address the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the 
maintenance plan must contain such contingency measures, with a 
schedule for implementation, as EPA deems necessary to assure prompt 
correction of any future 8-hour ozone violations. Section 175A of the 
CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance plan for areas seeking 
redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. The Calcagni memorandum 
dated September 4, 1992, provides additional guidance on the content of 
a maintenance plan. An ozone maintenance plan should address the 
following provisions:
    (1) An attainment emissions inventory;
    (2) A maintenance demonstration;
    (3) A monitoring network;
    (4) Verification of continued attainment; and
    (5) A contingency plan.
2. Analysis of the Reading Area Maintenance Plan
    a. Attainment Inventory--An attainment inventory includes the 
emissions during the time period associated with the monitoring data 
showing attainment. An attainment year of 2004 was used for the Reading 
Area since it is a reasonable year within the 3-year attainment period 
of 2003-2005 and accounts for reductions attributable to implementation 
of the CAA requirements to date. These 2004 levels of emissions are 
representative of attainment of both the 1-hour and 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    PADEP prepared comprehensive VOC and NOX emissions 
inventories for the Reading Area, including point, area, mobile on-
road, and mobile non-road sources for a base year of 2002.
    To develop the NOX and VOC base year emissions 
inventories, PADEP used the following approaches and sources of data:
    (i) Point source emissions--Pennsylvania requires owners and 
operators of larger facilities to submit annual production figures and 
emission calculations each year. Throughput data are multiplied by 
emission factors from Factor Information Retrieval (FIRE) Data System 
and EPA's publication series AP-42 and are based on Source 
Classification Code (SCC). Each process has at least one SCC assigned 
to it. If the owners and operators of facilities provide more accurate 
emission data based upon other factors, these emission estimates 
supersede those calculated using SCC codes.
    (ii) Area source emissions--Area source emissions are generally 
estimated by multiplying an emission factor by some known indicator or 
collective activity for each area source category at the county level. 
Pennsylvania estimates emissions from area sources using emission 
factors and SCC codes in a method similar to that used for stationary 
point sources. Emission factors may also be derived from research and 
guidance documents if those documents are more accurate than FIRE and 
AP-42 factors. Throughput estimates are derived from county-level 
activity data, by apportioning national and statewide activity data to 
counties, from census numbers, and from county employee numbers. County 
employee numbers are based upon North American Industry Classification 
System (NAICS) codes to establish that those numbers are specific to 
the industry covered.
    (iii) On-road mobile sources--PADEP employs an emissions estimation 
methodology that uses current EPA-approved highway vehicle emission 
model, MOBILE 6.2, to estimate highway vehicle emissions. The Reading 
Area highway vehicle emissions in 2004 were estimated using MOBILE 6.2 
and PENNDOT estimates of vehicles miles traveled (VMT) by vehicle type 
and roadway type.
    (iv) Mobile nonroad emissions--The 2002 emissions for the majority 
of nonroad emission source categories were estimated using the EPA 
NONROAD 2005 model. The NONROAD model estimates emissions for diesel, 
gasoline, liquefied petroleum gasoline, and compressed natural gas-
fueled nonroad equipment types and includes growth factors. The NONROAD 
model does not estimate emissions from aircraft or locomotives. For 
2002 locomotive emissions, PADEP projected emissions from a 1999 survey 
using national fuel information and EPA emission and conversion 
factors. There are no commercial aircraft operations in the Reading 
Area. For 2002 aircraft emissions, PADEP estimated emissions using 
small aircraft operation statistics from http://www.airnav.com, and 
emission factors and operational characteristics in the EPA-approved 
model, Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS).
    The 2004 attainment year VOC and NOX emissions for the 
Reading Area are summarized along with the 2009 and 2018 projected 
emissions for this area in Tables 4 and 5, which cover the 
demonstration of maintenance for this area. EPA has concluded that 
Pennsylvania has adequately derived and documented the 2004 attainment 
year VOC and NOX emissions for this area.
    (b) Maintenance Demonstration--On January 25, 2007, PADEP submitted 
a SIP revision to supplement its January 25, 2007, redesignation 
request. The submittal by PADEP consists of the maintenance plan as 
required by section 175A of the CAA. The Reading Area plan shows 
maintenance of the 8-hour and 1-hour ozone NAAQS by demonstrating that 
current and future emissions of VOC and NOX remain at or 
below the attainment year 2004 emissions levels throughout the Reading 
Area through the year 2018. The Reading Area maintenance demonstration 
need not be based on modeling. See Wall v. EPA, supra; Sierra Club v. 
EPA, supra. See also, 66 FR at 53099-53100; 68 FR at 25430-32.
    Tables 4 and 5 specify the VOC and NOX emissions for the 
Reading Area for 2004, 2009, and 2018. PADEP chose 2009 as an interim 
year in the 10-year maintenance demonstration period to demonstrate 
that the VOC and NOX emissions are not projected to increase 
above the 2004 attainment level during the time of the 10-year 
maintenance period.

[[Page 29910]]



            Table 4.--Total VOC Emissions for 2004-2018 (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     2004 VOC     2009 VOC     2018 VOC
         Source category            emissions    emissions    emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobile*..........................         17.0         13.1          7.5
Nonroad..........................          8.1          6.7          5.6
Area.............................         21.7         21.6         24.0
Point............................          4.7          3.4          4.3
                                  --------------------------------------
    Total........................         51.5         44.8        41.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Includes safety margin for 2009 and 2018 identified in the motor
  vehicle emission budgets for transportation conformity.


              Table 5.--Total NOX Emissions 2004-2018 (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     2004 NOX     2009 NOX     2018 NOX
         Source category            emissions    emissions    emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobile*..........................         29.8         21.3          9.0
Nonroad..........................         10.3          8.4          5.4
Area.............................          2.1          2.2          2.3
Point............................         16.0         16.8         19.2
                                  --------------------------------------
    Total........................         58.2         48.7        35.9
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Includes safety margin for 2009 and 2018 identified in the motor
  vehicle emission budgets for transportation conformity.

    The following are permanent and enforceable control measures to 
ensure emissions during the maintenance period are equal to or less 
than the emissions in the attainment year:
    (1) Pennsylvania's Portable Fuel Containers (December 8, 2004, 69 
FR 70893);
    (2) Pennsylvania's Consumer Products ( December 8, 2004, 69 FR 
70895); and
    (3) Pennsylvania's Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) 
Coatings (November 23, 2004, 69 FR 68080).
    Additionally, the following mobile programs are either effective or 
due to become effective and will further contribute to the maintenance 
demonstration of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS:
    (1) FMVCP for passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks and cleaner 
gasoline (2009 and 2018 fleet)--Tier 1 and Tier 2;
    (2) NLEV Program, which includes the Pennsylvania's Clean Vehicle 
Program for passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks (69 FR 72564, 
December 28, 1999);
    (3) Heavy duty diesel on-road (2004/2007) and low-sulfur on-road 
(2006) (66 FR 5002, January 18, 2001); and
    (4) Non-road emissions standards (2008) and off-road diesel fuel 
(2007/2010) (69 FR 38958, June 29, 2004).
    (5) Pennsylvania's vehicle emission inspection/maintenance program 
(October 6, 2005, 70 FR 58313).
    In addition to the permanent and enforceable measures, the Clean 
Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), promulgated May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162) 
should have positive impacts on Pennsylvania's air quality. CAIR, which 
will be implemented in the eastern portion of the country in two phases 
(2009 and 2015) should reduce long range transport of ozone precursors, 
which will have a beneficial effect on the air quality in the Reading 
Area.
    Pennsylvania and other nearby states are required to adopt a 
regulation implementing the requirements of CAIR or an equivalent 
program. On April 28, 2006 (71 FR 25328), EPA promulgated Federal 
Implementation Plans (FIPs) to reduce the interstate transport of 
NOX and sulfur dioxides that contribute significantly to 
nonattainment and maintenance 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS. 
Because Pennsylvania will not adopt its own CAIR requirements and 
obtain approval of the required SIP revision by September 2006, the FIP 
will become operative, imposing the Federal program upon CAIR-affected 
electric generating units in Pennsylvania. Therefore, allowances for 
CAIR-related sources will be limited to no more than the allowances 
issued pursuant to the FIP but may purchase additional allowances under 
the cap-and-trade rule in the FIP. The Reading Area has one source that 
is directly regulated by CAIR. For the maintenance demonstration, 
Pennsylvania did not rely upon any reductions from CAIR at this 
facility. However, the quality of air transported from upwind sources 
into the county would be improved.
    Based upon the comparison of the projected emissions and the 
attainment year emissions along with the additional measures, EPA 
concludes that PADEP has successfully demonstrated that the 8-hour 
ozone standard should be maintained in the Reading Area.
    (c) Monitoring Network--There is currently one monitor measuring 
ozone in the Reading Area. Pennsylvania will continue to operate its 
current air quality monitor in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.
    (d) Verification of Continued Attainment--The Commonwealth will 
track the attainment status of the ozone NAAQS in the Reading Area by 
reviewing air quality and emissions during the maintenance period. The 
Commonwealth will perform an annual evaluation of two key factors, VMT 
data and emissions reported from stationary sources, and compare them 
to the assumptions about these factors used in the maintenance plan. 
The Commonwealth will also evaluate the periodic (every three years) 
emission inventories prepared under EPA's Consolidated Emission 
Reporting Regulation (40 CFR 51 Subpart A) to see if the area exceed 
the attainment year inventory (2004) by more than 10 percent. Based on 
these evaluations, the Commonwealth will consider whether any further 
emission control measures should be implemented.
    (e) The Maintenance Plan's Contingency Measures--The contingency 
plan provisions are designed to promptly correct a violation of the 
NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. Section 175A of the CAA requires 
that a maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems 
necessary to ensure that the State will promptly correct a violation of 
the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The maintenance plan should 
identify the events that would ``trigger'' the adoption and

[[Page 29911]]

implementation of a contingency measure(s), the contingency measure(s) 
that would be adopted and implemented, and the schedule indicating the 
time frame by which the state would adopt and implement the measure(s).
    The ability of the Reading Area to stay in compliance with the 8-
hour ozone standard after redesignation depends upon VOC and 
NOX emissions in the area remaining at or below 2004 levels. 
The Commonwealth's maintenance plan projects VOC and NOX 
emissions to decrease and stay below 2004 levels through the year 2018. 
The Commonwealth's maintenance plan outlines the procedures for the 
adoption and implementation of contingency measures to further reduce 
emissions should a violation occur.
    Contingency measures will be considered if for two consecutive 
years the fourth highest eight-hour ozone concentrations at the Reading 
Area monitor are above 84 ppb. If this trigger point occurs, the 
Commonwealth will evaluate whether additional local emission control 
measures should be implemented in order to prevent a violation of the 
air quality standard. PADEP will analyze the conditions leading to the 
excessive ozone levels and evaluate what measures might be most 
effective in correcting the excessive ozone levels. PADEP will also 
analyze the potential emissions effect of Federal, state and local 
measure that have been adopted but not yet implemented at the time 
excessive ozone levels occurred. PADEP will then begin the process of 
implementing any selected measures.
    Contingency measures will be considered in the event that a 
violation of the 8-hour ozone standard occurs at any monitor in the 
Reading Area. In the event of a violation of the 8-hour ozone standard, 
contingency measures will be adopted in order to return the area to 
attainment with the standard. Contingency measures to be considered for 
the Reading Area will include, but not limited to the following:
    Regulatory measures:

--Additional controls on consumer products.
--Additional control on portable fuel containers.

    Non-regulatory measures:

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

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

--Within 1 month of the trigger, submit request to begin regulatory 
development process.
--Within 3 months of the trigger, review of regulation by Air Quality 
Technical Advisory Committee (AQTAC), Citizens Advisory Council (CAC) 
and other advisory committees as appropriate.
--Within 6 months of the trigger, Environmental Quality Board (EQB) 
meeting/action.
--Within 8 months of the trigger, publish in the Pennsylvania Bulletin 
for comment as proposed rulemaking.
--Within 10 months of the trigger, public hearing takes place and 
comment period on proposed rule closes.
--Within 11 months of the trigger, House and Senate Standing Committees 
and Independent Regulatory Review Commission (IRRC) comment on proposed 
rule.
--Within 13 months of the trigger, AQTAC, CAC and other committees 
review responses to comments and draft final rulemaking.
--Within 16 months of the trigger, EQB meeting/action.
--Within 17 months of the trigger, IRRC action on rulemaking.
--Within 18 months of the trigger, Attorney General's review/action.
--Within 19 months of the trigger, publication in the Pennsylvania 
Bulletin as a final rulemaking and submit to EPA as a SIP revision. The 
regulation would become effective upon publication in the Pennsylvania 
Bulletin.

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

--Within 2 months of the trigger: Identify stakeholders for potential 
non-regulatory measures.
--Within 3 months of the trigger, if funding is necessary, identify 
potential sources of funding and the timeframe under which funds would 
be available. In addition to non-Title V Clean Air funds, the following 
program may be able to provide funding: For transportation projects, 
the Federal Highway Administration, as allocated to the Northern Tier 
Rural Planning Organization; for projects which will also have an 
energy efficient co-benefit, the Pennsylvania Energy Harvest program; 
for projects which would be under taken by small business and are 
pollution prevention projects, the Small Business Advantage Grant and 
Small Business Pollution Prevention Loan programs; for projects which 
will involve alternative fuels for vehicles/refueling operations, the 
Alternative Fuel Incentive Grant program; for projects involving diesel 
emissions, Federal Energy Policy Act diesel reduction funds allocated 
to Pennsylvania or for which Pennsylvania or project sponsors may apply 
under a competitive process.
--Within 9 months of the trigger, enter into agreements with 
implementing organizations if state loans or grants are involved. 
Quantify projected emission benefits.
--Within 12 months of the trigger, submit a revised SIP to EPA.
--Within 12-24 months of the trigger, implement strategies and 
projects.

    (f) Revisions to the 1-Hour Maintenance Plan.
    In addition to demonstrating continued maintenance until 2018, the 
January 25, 2007, maintenance plan also amends the February 3, 1997, 
maintenance plan in the approved SIP at 40 CFR 52.2020(e)(1) for the 
Reading Area. Pennsylvania's January 25, 2007 maintenance plan SIP 
revision for the Reading Area amends the approved 1-hour maintenance 
plan by removing I/M from the contingency plan. The contingency 
measures in the February 3, 1997 maintenance plan would be replaced by 
those in the January 25, 2007, maintenance plan. These contingency 
measures would be implemented only in response to recorded exceedances 
or violations of the 8-hour ozone standards and no longer tied to 
exceedances or violations of the 1-hour ozone standard.
    With regard to the first change, in December 2003, Pennsylvania 
commenced implementation of an OTR enhanced I/M program in Berks 
County. EPA believes that the actual implementation of the OTR enhanced 
I/M program means that the contingency measure of a basic I/M program 
is no longer available as a contingency. The maintenance demonstration 
relies upon the OTR enhanced I/M program. EPA believes that the January 
25, 2007 maintenance plan SIP revision has an

[[Page 29912]]

adequate suite of contingency measures. Therefore, for these reasons, 
EPA believes that the contingency measures plan for the Reading Area 
currently does not need to contain a basic I/M program since the OTR 
enhanced program has been implemented.
    With regard to removal of the 1-hour contingency measure triggers 
from the maintenance plan, under 40 CFR 51.905(e) of the April 30, 
2004, Phase 1 final rule, EPA may approve a SIP revision requesting the 
removal of the obligation to implement contingency measures upon a 
violation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS when the State submits and EPA 
approves an attainment demonstration for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for an 
area initially designated nonattainment for the 8-hour NAAQS or a 
maintenance SIP for the 8-hour NAAQS for an area initially designated 
attainment for the 8-hour NAAQS. EPA believes the rationale of 
51.905(e) in relieving areas designated under the 8-hour standard of 
their 1-hour maintenance plan triggers analogously applies to areas 
that are being redesignated as attainment with the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 
Accordingly, EPA is proposing to relieve the Reading Area of its 
maintenance plan obligations with respect to implementing contingency 
measures in the event of a violation of the 1-hour standard. 
Furthermore, to the extent that 40 CFR 51.905(e) of the Phase 1 final 
rule may be vacated by the South Coast decision, EPA believes there is 
an alternate basis for allowing the Commonwealth to remove the 1-hour 
triggers from the SIP-approved maintenance for the Reading Area. EPA 
has determined that the 8-hour NAAQS provides increased public health 
protection as compared to the 1-hour ozone standard. See 62 FR at 38859 
(July 18, 1997). Because the 8-hour standard is more stringent than the 
1-hour standard, a maintenance plan with triggers tied to the 8-hour 
standard will be more protective of public health than a maintenance 
plan with contingency measure triggers tied to the 1-hour standard. 
This greater protectiveness of the 8-hour standard provides an 
additional justification for removing the 1-hour triggers from the 
maintenance plan.
    (g) Summary of EPA's Evaluation of the Maintenance Plan.
    EPA concludes that the January 25, 2007 maintenance plan meets the 
requirements of section 175A of the CAA and the revisions to the 1-hour 
maintenance plan otherwise meets the requirements of the CAA including 
section 110(l) as it does not interfere with any applicable requirement 
such as those concerning attainment, reasonable further progress 
towards attainment or maintenance.

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

A. What Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets?

    Under the CAA, States are required to submit, at various times, 
control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans in ozone areas. These 
control strategy SIPs (i.e. RFP SIPs and attainment demonstration SIPs) 
and maintenance plans identify and establish MVEBs for certain criteria 
pollutants and/or their precursors to address pollution from on-road 
mobile sources. Pursuant to 40 CFR part 93 and 51.112, MVEBs must be 
established in an ozone maintenance plan. A MVEB is the portion of the 
total allowable emissions that is allocated to highway and transit 
vehicle use and emissions. A MVEB serves as a ceiling on emissions from 
an area's planned transportation system. The MVEB concept is further 
explained in the preamble to the November 24, 1993, transportation 
conformity rule (58 FR 62188). The preamble also describes how to 
establish and revise the MVEBs in control strategy SIPs and maintenance 
plans.
    Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation projects, such 
as the construction of new highways, must ``conform'' to (i.e., be 
consistent with) the part of the State's air quality plan that 
addresses pollution from cars and trucks. ``Conformity'' to the SIP 
means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality 
violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of 
or reasonable progress towards the NAAQS. If a transportation plan does 
not ``conform,'' most new projects that would expand the capacity of 
roadways cannot go forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth EPA 
policy, criteria, and procedures for demonstrating and assuring 
conformity of such transportation activities to a SIP.
    When reviewing submitted ``control strategy'' SIPs or maintenance 
plans containing MVEBs, EPA must affirmatively find the MVEB budget 
contained therein ``adequate'' for use in determining transportation 
conformity. After EPA affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB is 
adequate for transportation conformity purposes, that MVEB can be used 
by State and Federal agencies in determining whether proposed 
transportation projects ``conform'' to the SIP as required by section 
176(c) of the CAA. EPA's substantive criteria for determining 
``adequacy'' of a MVEB are set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4).
    EPA's process for determining ``adequacy'' consists of three basic 
steps: Public notification of a SIP submission, a public comment 
period, and EPA's adequacy finding. This process for determining the 
adequacy of submitted SIP MVEBs was initially outlined in EPA's May 14, 
1999 guidance, ``Conformity Guidance on Implementation of March 2, 
1999, Conformity Court Decision.'' This guidance was finalized in the 
Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for the ``New 8-Hour Ozone 
and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Miscellaneous 
Revisions for Existing Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule 
Amendments--Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Change'' on 
July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). EPA follows this guidance and rulemaking in 
making its adequacy determinations.
    The MVEBs for the Reading Area are listed in Table 1 of this 
document for the 2009, and 2018 years and are the projected emissions 
for the on-road mobile sources plus any portion of the safety margin 
allocated to the MVEBs. These emission budgets, when approved by EPA, 
must be used for transportation conformity determinations.

B. What Is a Safety Margin?

    A ``safety margin'' is the difference between the attainment level 
of emissions (from all sources) and the projected level of emissions 
(from all sources) in the maintenance plan. The attainment level of 
emissions is the level of emissions during one of the years in which 
the area met the NAAQS. The following example is for the 2018 safety 
margin: The Reading Area first attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS during 
the 2002 to 2004 time period. The Commonwealth used 2004 as the year to 
determine attainment levels of emissions for the Reading Area.
    The total emissions from point, area, mobile on-road, and mobile 
non-road sources in 2004 were 51.5 tpd of VOC and 58.2 tpd of 
NOX. PADEP projected emissions out to the year 2018 and 
obtained totals of 40.4 tpd of VOC and 35.3 tpd of NOX from 
all sources in the Reading Area. The safety margin for the Reading Area 
for 2018 would be the difference between these amounts. This difference 
is 11.1 tpd of VOC and 22.9 tpd of NOX. The emissions up to 
the level of the attainment year including the safety margins are 
projected to maintain the area's air quality consistent with the 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS. The safety margin is the extra emissions reduction below 
the attainment levels

[[Page 29913]]

that can be allocated for emissions by various sources as long as the 
total emission levels are maintained at or below the attainment levels. 
Table 6 shows the safety margins for the 2009 and 2018 years.

       Table 6.--2009 and 2018 Safety Margins for the Reading Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        VOC emissions     NOX emissions
           Inventory year                   (tpd)             (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004 Attainment.....................              51.5              58.2
2009 Interim........................              43.8              48.1
2009 Safety Margin..................               7.7              10.1
2004 Attainment.....................              51.5              58.2
2018 Final..........................              40.4              35.3
2018 Safety Margin..................              11.1              22.9
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

  Table 7.--2009 and 2018 Final MVEBs for the Reading Area Tons per Day
                      [Rounded to nearest 0.1 tpd]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Inventory year               VOC emissions     NOX emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009 projected on-road mobile source              12.1              20.7
 projected emissions................
2009 Safety Margin Allocated to                    1.0               0.6
 MVEBs..............................
2009 MVEBs..........................              13.1              21.3
2018 projected on-road mobile source               6.5               8.4
 projected emissions................
2018 Safety Margin Allocated to                    1.0               0.6
 MVEBs..............................
2018 MVEBs..........................               7.5               9.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Why Are the MVEBs Approvable?

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

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

    The MVEBs for the Reading Area maintenance plan are being posted to 
EPA's conformity Web site concurrent with this proposal. The public 
comment period will end at the same time as the public comment period 
for this proposed rule. In this case, EPA is concurrently processing 
the action on the maintenance plan and the adequacy process for the 
MVEBs contained therein. In this proposed rule, EPA is proposing to 
find the MVEBs adequate and also proposing to approve the MVEBs as part 
of the maintenance plan. The MVEBs cannot be used for transportation 
conformity until the maintenance plan update and associated MVEBs are 
approved in a final Federal Register notice, or EPA otherwise finds the 
budgets adequate in a separate action following the comment period.
    If EPA receives adverse written comments with respect to the 
proposed approval of the Reading Area MVEBs, or any other aspect of our 
proposed approval of this updated maintenance plan, we will respond to 
the comments on the MVEBs in our final action or proceed with the 
adequacy process as a separate action. Our action on the Reading Area 
MVEBs will also be announced on EPA's conformity Web site: http://www.epa.gov/oms/traq, (once there, click on the ``Conformity'' button, 
then look for ``Adequacy Review of SIP Submissions for Conformity'').

VIII. Proposed Actions

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

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and 
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and 
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive 
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations

[[Page 29914]]

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 requirements and imposes no additional requirements 
beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator 
certifies that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to 
approve pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose 
any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it 
does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely 
affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). This proposed rule also does not have a 
substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the 
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on 
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it have substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified 
in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it 
merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a Federal 
requirement, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of 
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This 
proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997), because it approves a state rule implementing a 
Federal standard.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required by section 3 
of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing 
this proposed rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate 
drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and 
provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied 
with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining 
the takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney 
General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and 
Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the executive order.
    This rule proposing to approve the redesignation of the Reading 
Area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the associated 
maintenance plan, the 2002 base year inventory, and the MVEBs 
identified in the maintenance plan does not impose an information 
collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

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

40 CFR Part 81

    Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.

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

    Dated: May 22, 2007.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. E7-10356 Filed 5-29-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P