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
PDF Version (13 pp, 247K, About PDF)
[Federal Register: July 23, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 142)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 42731-42743]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr23jy08-17]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0624; FRL-8694-9]
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
[[Page 42732]]
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 August 22, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2007-0624 by one of the following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
B. E-mail: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov.
C. 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.
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-
2007-0624. 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 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 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
IX. 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
[[Page 42733]]
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 concentration 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;
[[Page 42734]]
``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 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
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 42735]]
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, 12465-12466, (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:
[[Page 42736]]
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 DC Circuit recognized the inequity in such retroactive
rulemaking. See, Sierra Club v. Whitman, 285 F. 3d 63 (DC Cir. 2002),
in which the DC 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
[[Page 42737]]
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 [bs] (``transportation
conformity'') as well as to all other Federally supported or funded
projects [bs](``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
[[Page 42738]]
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)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Point Area Mobile Nonroad Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 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:
1. Stationary Point Sources
NOX SIP Call (66 FR 43795, August 21, 2001).
2. Stationary Area Sources
Solvent Cleaning (68 FR 2206, January 16, 2003).
Portable Fuel Containers (69 FR 70893, December 8, 2004).
3. Highway Vehicle Sources
Federal Motor Vehicle Control Programs (FMVCP)
--Tier 1 (56 FR 25724, June 5, 1991).
--Tier 2 (65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000).
Heavy Duty 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
[[Page 42739]]
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 vehicle 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 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 42740]]
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:
1. Pennsylvania's Portable Fuel Containers (69 FR 70893, December
8, 2004)
2. Pennsylvania's Consumer Products (69 FR 70895, December 8, 2004)
3. Pennsylvania's Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM)
Coatings (69 FR 68080, November 23, 2004)
4. NOX SIP Call (66 FR 43795, August 21, 2001)
5. Federal Clean Air Interstate Rule (71 FR 25328, April 28, 2006)
6. 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)
7. 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
8. Heavy duty diesel on-road (2004/2007) and low-sulfur on-road
(2006) (66 FR 5002, January 18, 2001)
9. Vehicles Safety Inspection Program (70 FR 58313, October 6,
2005)
10. 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 part 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 measures 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 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 be
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 controls 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
[[Page 42741]]
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)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC emissions NOX emissions
Inventory year (tpd) (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
[[Page 42742]]
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
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC Emissions NOX Emissions
Inventory year (tpd) (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009 Projected On Road (Highway) 3.87 11.11
Emissions..............................
2009 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs... 0.24 0.33
2009 MVEBs.............................. 4.11 11.44
2018 Projected On Road (Highway) 2.37 4.76
Emissions..............................
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
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC Emissions NOX Emissions
Inventory year (tpd) (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009 Projected On Road (Highway) 2.82 4.49
Emissions..............................
2009 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs... 0.24 0.36
2009 MVEBs.............................. 3.06 4.85
2018 Projected On Road (Highway) 1.58 1.99
Emissions..............................
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 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 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: 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.
[[Page 42743]]
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)).
This action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
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
(Pub. L. 104-4). Because this action affects the status of a
geographical area or allows the state to avoid adopting or implementing
other requirements and because this action does not impose any new
requirements on sources, this proposed rule also does not have a
substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified
in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it
merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a Federal
requirement, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of
power and responsibilities established in the 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.
Dated: July 9, 2008.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. E8-16639 Filed 7-22-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![[logo] US EPA](https://webarchive.library.unt.edu/eot2008/20081105185359im_/http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}